Skip to main content

Full text of "Reports of the Immigration Commission"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at http : //books . google . com/| 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



/ ^ /(!}Ci . /^^ 




HARVARD 
COLLEGE 
LIBRARY 



Digitized by 



Google 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



6l8T CONOEBBB ) CCXTITV j DoCUMKNT 

SdSessim f SENATi, j ^^^^ 



.REPORTS OF THE 'IMMIGRATION COMMISSIO]L..n- 



^ 



3"^/, 



IMMIGRATION AND CRIME 




PBE8ENTED BY MR. DILLINGHAM 

December 5, 1910. — Referred to the Committee on Immigration 
and ordered to be printed, with illustrations 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OrPICE 

1911 



35l>2 Hkk 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



us 10 S9 0.16 



rrr.rvard Colle^^e library 

Gift ( f 
ilow. >. W. McG; 1j, 
of vS,''K-^hinp:ton 

THE noaoEATiov coionssiov. 



Senator William P. Dillingham, Representative Benjamin F. Howell. 

Chairman. Representative William S. Bbnnst. 

Senator Henrt Cabot Lodge. Representative John L. Bubnett. 

Senator Asbuby C. Latimbr.o Mr. Charles P. Neill. 

Senator Anselm J. McLaubin> Mr. Jebemiah W. Jenks. 

Senator Ls Rot Pebct.« Mr. William R. Wheelbb. 

Secretaries: 

Mobton E. Crane. W. W. HusBAKm 

C. S. Atkinson. 

(Mef SUitiitician: 
Feed 0. Croxton. 



Extrad frcffii tui of Congreu of February tO, 1907, creating and defining (he duHa of (he 

Immigration Commiseion. 

That a commission is hereby created, consisting of three Senators, to be appointed 
by the President of the Senate, and three Members of the House of Representatives, 
to be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and three persons 
to be appointed bjr the President of the United States. Said c(»nmission shall make 
full inquiry, examination, and investigation, by subcommittee or otherwise, into the 
subject of immi^tion. For the purpose of saia inquiry, examination, and investiga- 
tion said commission is authorized to send for persons and papers, make all necessary 
travel, either in the United States or any foreign coimtry, and, through the chair- 
man of the commission, or any member thereof, to administer oaths and to examine 
witnesses and papers respecting all matters pertaining to the subject, and to employ 
necessary clerical and other assistance. Saia commission shall report to Congress the 
conclusions reached by it, and make such recommendations as in its judgment may 
seem proper. Such sums of money as may be necessary for the said inquiry, examina- 
tion, and investigation are hereby appropriated and authorized to be ]>aia out of the 
''immigrant fund" on the certificate of the chairman of said commission, including 
all expenses of the commissioners, and a reasonable compensation, to be fixed by the 
President of the United States, for those members of the commission who are not 
Members of Congress; * * * . 

.• Died February 20, 1908. 

* Appointed to succeed Mr. Latimer, February 25, 1908. Died December 22, 1909. 

• Appointed to succeed Mr. McLAurin, March 16, 1910. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



LIST OF KEPOSTS OF THE IXMIORATIOH COMMISSIOH. 



V<diiiiies 1 and 2. Abstracts of Reports of the Immlgratioii ComTnlwfon, with CoDdosioDS and Reooni- 
mendatlons and Views of the Minority. (These volumes Include the Commission's complete reports 
on the following subjects: Immigration Conditions in Hawaii; Immigration and Insanity; Immi- 
grants In Charity Ho^itals; Alien Seamen and Stowaways; Contract Labor and Induced and Assisted 
Immigration; The Greek Padrone System in the United States; Peonage.) (S. Doc No. 747, 6l8t 
Cong., 3d sees.) 

Volume 3. Statistical Review of Immigration, 1819-1010— Distribution of Immigrants, 1850-1000. (S. Doo. 
No. 756, 61st Cong., 3d sees.) 

Volume 4. Emigration Conditions in Europe. (S. Doc. No. 748, 61st Cong., Sd sess.) 

Volume 5. Dictionary of Races or Peoples. (S. Doc. No. 662, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

Volumes 6 and 7. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 1, Bituminous Coal Mining. (S. Doc. No. 633, 6l8t Gong., 
2d sess.) 

Volumes 8 and 0. Inmilgrants in Industries: Vt^ 2, Iron and Steel Manufacturing. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61tt 
Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 10. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 3, Cotton Goods Manufacturing in the North Atlantic Statw— 
Pt. 4, Woolen and Worsted Goods Manufacturing. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 11. Inmilgrants in Industries: Pt. 5, Silk Goods Manufacturing and Dyeing— Pt. 6, Clothing 
Manuliacturing— Pt. 7, Collar, CuH, and Shirt Manufacturing. (S. Doc. No. 033, 61st Cong., 2d seas.) 

Volume 12. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 8, Leather Manufacturing— Pt. 0, Boot and Shoe Manufac- 
turing— Pt. 10, Gk>ve Manufacturing. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 13. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 11, Slaughtering and Meat Packing. (S. Doc. No. 633, 6l8t 
Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 14. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 12, Glass Manufacturing— Pt. 13, Agricultural Implement 
and Vehicle Manufacturing. (S. Doc No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 15. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 14, Cigar and Tobacco Manufacturing— Pt. 15, Furniture Man- 
ufacturing— Pt. 16, Sugar Refining. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 16. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 17, Copper Mining and Smelting— Pt. 18, Iron Ore Mining— 
Pt. 10, Anthracite Coal Mining— Pt. 20, OU Refining. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 17. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 21, Diverslfled Industries, Vol. I. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., • 
ad sess.) 

Volume 18. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 21, Diverslfled Industries, Vol. 11— Pt. 22, The FkMting Immi- 
grant Labor Supply. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volumes 10 and 20. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 23, Summary Report oA Immigrants in Manufacturing 
and Mining. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volumes 21 and 22. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 24, Recent Immigrants in Agriculture. (S. Doc. No. 
633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volumes 23-25. Immigrants in Industries: Pt. 25, Japanese and Other Immigrant Races in the PaolAo 
Coast and Rocky Mountain States. (S. Doc. No. 633, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volumes 26 and 27. Immigrants in Cities. (S. Doc. No. 338, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volume 28. Occupations of the First and Second Generations of Immigrants in the United States— F^ 
cundity of Immigrant Women. (S. Doc. No. 282, 6l8t Cong., 2d sess.) 

Volumes 20-33. The Children of Immigrants in Schools. (S. Doc. No. 740, 61st Cong., 3d sees.) 

Volumes 34 and 35. Immigrants as Charity Seekers. (S. Doc. No. 666, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

Volume 36. Immigration and Crime. (S. Doc. No. 750, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

Volume 37. Steerage Conditions— Importation and Harboring of Women for Immoral Purposes— Immi- 
grant Homes and Aid Societies— Immigrant Banks. (S. Doc. No. 753, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

Volume 38. Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of Immigrants. (S. Doc. No. 208, 61st Cong., 2d aem^ 

Volume 30. Federal Immigration Legislatkm— Digest of Immigration Decisions— Steerage LegislattaD, 
1810-lOOfr-^tate Immigration and Alien Laws. (S. Doc. No. 758, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

Volume 40. The Immigration Situation in Other Countries: Canada— Australia— New Zealand— Argen- 
tina— BrariL (S. Doc. No. 761, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

Volume 41. Statements and Recommendations Submitted by Societies and Organisations Interested lo 
the Subject of Immigration. (S. Doc. No. 764, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

Volume 42. Index of Reports of the Immigration Commission. (S. Doc. No. 785, 61st Cong., 8d sess.) 

Ul 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



lETTEB OF TRAHSMITTAI. 

The Immigration Commission, 
Wdshington, D, C, December J, 1910, 
To the Sixty-first Congress: 

I have the honor to transmit herewith, on behalf of the Immi- 
gration Commission, a report entitled •Immigration and Crime/' 
which report was prepared under the direction of the Commission 
by Leslie Hayfoi:d, special agent. 
Respectfully, 

William P. Dillingham, 

Ohairman. 

IT 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



CONTENTS. 



Chapter I. — Introduction: P«««. 

Census data on volume of crimcv 2 

Chapter II. — Character and scope of investigation: 

Classification of offenses 10 

Classification of offenders l2 

Method of analysis 12 

Chapter III. — General summary of results: 

Immigrants and natives 13 - 

The second generation 13 

Kaces and mationalities 16 

Simunary by crime 17 

Summary by nationidity j 18 

The cities of New York and Chicago ^ 20 

The States of New York and Massachusetts 23 

Aliens, or unnaturalized immigrants 24 

Length of residence in the United States prior to commitment 32 

Chapter IV. — Character of immigrant and of native criminality: 

Classes of crime 36 

Gainful offenses 39 

Offenses of i>ersonal violence 41 

Offenses against public policy 43 

C?llen8es against chastity 45 

Chapter V. — ^The color factor in the native group: 

Classes of crime 49 

Gainful offenses 61 

Offenses of personal violence 52 

Offenses against public policy 53 

Offenses against chastity 54 

Chapter VI. — ^The parentage factor in the native group: 

Classes of crime 58 

Gainful offenses 60 

Offenses of personal violence 62 

Offenses against public policy 64 

Offenses against chastity v 66 

Chapter yil. — Differences in immigrant and second generation crime: 

Convictions in New York court of general sessions 67 

Classes of crime 68 

Gainful offenses 71 

Offenses of personal violence 73 

Offenses against public policy 75 

Summary 76 

Commitments to Mas>ac'hu:?ett.'' penal im-titutionia 77 

Classes of crime ^ 80 

Gainful offenses 81 

Offenses of j)ersonal violence 82 

Offenses against public policy •. 83 

Offenses against chastity 84 

Stimmary 84 

Chapter VIII. — New York City and State: 

New York City magistrates' courts 88 

Compilation of data 88 

Classes of criAe 90 

Gainful offenses 92 

Offenses of personal violence 94 

Offenses against public policy 96 

V 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



VI The Immigration G)mmissioii. 

Chapter VIII. — New York City and State — Continued. Page. 

New York City raagistratee courts — Continued. 

Offenses against chastity 100 

Summary 101 

The Greeks in Manhattan and the Bronx 103 

New York City court of general sessions 105 

Classe.^ of crime 107 

Gainful offenses 110 

Offenses of personal violence 113 

Offenses against public policy 115 

Summary 117 

County and supreme courts of the State of New York 119 

Classes of crime 120 

Gainful offences 123 

Offenses of personal violence 126 

Offenses gainst public policy 128 

Sunmiary 129 

Chapter IX. — The city of Chicago: 

Police arrests 133 

Classes of crime ^ 135 

Gainful offenses 139 

Offenses of personal violence 142 

Offenses against public policy 146 

Offenses against chastity 149 

Siunmary 152 

Chapter X. — The State of Massachusetts: 

Commitments to penal institutions 159 

Classes of crime 161 

Gainful offenses 165 

Offenses of personal violence 168 

Offenses against public policy 171 

Offenses against chastity 174 

Sunmiary 175 

Chapter XI. — Alien criminality: 

Alien prisoners in the United States in 1908 179 

Classes of crime 181 

Gainful offenses 184 

Offenses of personal violence 187 

Offenses against public policy 190 

Offenses against chastity *. 192 

Summary 194 

Alien prisoners committed within three years after arrival in tiie United 

States 197 

Gainful offenses 198 

Offenses of personal violence 199 

Offenses s^ainst public policy 200 

Offenses against chastity 201 

Summary by classes of crimes , 202 

Offenses of special gravity 203 

Burglary, homicide, and robbery 205 

Chapter XII.— <)ensu3 data on crime: 

Prisoners enumerated June 30, 1904 209 

Nativity 209 

Major and minor offenders 214 

Prisoners committed durino: 1004 217 

Major and minor offenders. 220 

Parentage 223 

Offense and country of birth 227 

Age 232 

Age and sex 237 

Citizenship 241 

Literacy 244 

Juvenile delinquents enumerated June 30. 1904 249 

Nativity, color, and sex 249 

Immigrant and native whites 251 

Ratio to population 253 

Juvenile delinquents and juvenile population 257 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Contents. VII 

Chapter XII. — Census data on crime — Continued. Page. 

Juvenile delinquents committed during 1904 258 

Color, nativity, and sex 258 

Immigrant and native whites 261 

Parentage , 264 

Offense and parentage -. 266 

Aee V...» 267 

Literacy 271 

Language spoken 273 

Chaptbr XIII. — Entry of foreign criminal-* into the United State* 277 

< General tahlea 287 

List of text tables 439 

List of general tables 445 

List of charts • 449 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



IMMTGRATION AND CRfflE. 



Chapter I. 
IITTEODUCTIOir. 

No satisfactory evidence has yet been produced to show that immi- 
^ation has resulted in an increase in crime disproportionate to the 
increase in adult population. Such comparable statistics of crime 
and population as it nas been possible to obtain indicate that immi- 
grants are less prone to commit crime than are native Americans. 

The statistics do indicate, however, that the American-bom children 
of immigrants exceed thS children of natives in relative amount of 
crime. It also appears from data bearing on the volume of crime that 
juvenile delinquency is more common among immigrants than it is 
among Americans. There are, however, two factors affecting these 
concluions. First, immigrants are found in greater proportion in 
cities than in rural communities, and the criminaUty of the children 
of immigrants is largely a product of the city. Second, the majority 
of the juvenile delinquents are found in the North Atlantic States, 
where immigrants form a larger proportion of the population than in 
any other section of the country. This excessive representation of 
immigrants in the population of that group of States which reports 
the Lurgest number of juvenile delinquents ** makes the percentage of 
immigrant juvenile deunquents in the country at large greater than 
it would be if the immigrant population were more evenly distributed 
throughout the United States. 

Is the volume of crime in the United States augmented by the 
presence amon^ us of the immigrant and his offspring ? is the question 
usually asked first in considering the relation of immi^ation to crime. 
In natural sequence to it is the further question. If immigration in- 
creases crime, what races are responsible ror such increase ? No one 
has satisfactorily answered these questions ; no one can answer them 
fully without a machinery far greater than that which the Immigration 
Commission has had at its disposal. 

In order even closely to approximate accuracy in answering these 
questions, at least the following facts are necessary: The age, sex, 
race, and offense of every offender committed to a penal institution 
during a definite period of time, and the age, sex, and race of every 
person in the general population on a date falling within that period 
of time. Such facts have never been ascertained. Without them all 
conclusions regarding the relative amount of crime committed by 
immigrants and natives must be largely conjectural. 

Sucn figures as are presented in the Census reports indicate that 
immigration has not increased the volume of crime to a distinguishable 

o Juvenile delinquency differs gresXly in the several sections of the country, being 
very largely determined by local conditions, such as the existence of children s courts 
and reformatory institutiouB. 

1 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



The Immigration Commission. 



extent, if at all. In fact, the figures seem to indicate a contrary 
result. 

Immigration has, however, evidently made changes in the char- 
acter of crime in the United States. Whether these changes are for 
better or for worse must be left to individual decision. The deter- 
mination of the nature of these changes has been the chief work 
undertaken in this investigation of immigration and crime. From 
the data gathered it is evident that immigration haa had a marked 
effect upon the nature of the crimes committed in the United States. 
This effect has been to increase the commission of offenses of personal 
violence (such as abduction and kidnaping, assault, homicide, and 
rape), and of that large class of violations of the law known as offenses 
against public poUcy (which include disorderiy conduct, drunkenness, 
vagrancy, the violation of corporation ordinances, and manv offenses 
incident to city life). It is also probable that immigration has some- 
what increased offenses against chastity, especially those connected 
with prostitution. That certain offenses of pecuniary gain, such as 
blackmail and extortion and the receiving of stolen property, are more 
common now because of immigration is likewise possible, but it can 
not be said that the majority of the gainful offenses have increased 
because of immigration. Indeed, the data analyzed in this report 
appear to indicate a far greater commission of such offenses by 
Americans than by immigrants. • 

Some of the changes in the character of crime may be traced to 
immigration from specific countries, although the difficulty of obtain- 
ing data regarding race has rendered the determination of racial 
influences almost impossible. The increase in offenses of personal 
violence in this country is largely traceable to immigration from 
southern Europe, and especiallv from Italy. This is most marked in 
connection with the crime of homicide; of all the various race and 
nationaUty groups appearing in the data collected, the Italian stands 
out prominently as having the largest percentage of cases of homicide 
among its crimes. Abduction and kidnaping likewise have evidently 
become more prevalent because of ItaUan immigration. The increase 
in offenses against public policy is perhaps more due to the growth 
of cities and the resultant increase in the number of forbidden acts 
than it is to immigration. To immi^ation, however, some increase 
in the commission of these acts is evidently due and may be largely 
traced to immigration from* Ireland, Scotland, Italy, Greece, and 
Russia. The Irish and Scotch immigrants are notable in penal rec- 
ords for intoxication, the ItaUan for offenses of violence against 
public policy, and the Greek and Russian for the violation of corpora- 
tion ordinances in large cities. Such probable increase in offenses 
against chastity as appears due to immigration is chiefly of crimes 
connected with prostitution, and has evidently been largely caused by 
immigration from Franc e and Russia. 

CENSUS DATA ON VOLUME OF CRIME. 

The only source of information regarding the commission of crime 
in the Umted States at large is the Census Report on Prisoners and 
Juvenile Delinqi^ents. The latest report ** contains data collected in 

a FrisoneiB and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904. Bureau of the Census. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Cnme. 



8 



1904, or four years after the taking of the census of population. 
The comparison of these statistics of crime with the statistics of 
population is therefore liable to the objection that no allowance has 
Deen made for the probable increase m the immigrant population 
from 1900 to 1904, and that the representation of immigrants in the 
general population as shown by the 1900 figures is very likely less 
than was actually the case in 1904 when the census of prisoners was 
taken. It must be noted also that the factor of the location of the 
immigrant population is not taken into consideration in the census 
report. Cnme more frequently becomes a matter of public record 
in urban conmiunities, and therefore an absolute comparison as to 
the extent of crime is not possible between urban and rural commu- 
nities; but it is in urban conmiunities that the immigrant popula- 
tion is most concentrated, and immigrants are therefore probably 
more largely represented in the criminal class of the cities than in 
the crimmal class of rural communities. This has doubtless resulted 
in the recording of a greater proportion of immigrant crime than if 
the immigrant population were more widely distributed. These are, 
nevertheless, the most comparable statistics of crime and population 
available, and may be employed as a means of throwing some light 
on the (question of the relative amount of immigrant and native 
criminality. 

In the following table are shown the percentage of foreign-born 
persons among the white male prisoners of known nativity enu- 
merated on June 30, 1904, and the percentage of foreign-bom in the 
general male population 15 years of age or over in 1900. 

Table 1. — "Per cent of foreign-bom among white prisoners of known nativity enumerated 
June SO, 1904, and in the general while male population 15 years of age or over^ 1900, 
by geographic division. 





Per cent foreign-bom— 


DtvWon. 


Among white pris- 
oners of known 
nativity enu- 
merated June 30, 
1904. 


In the gen- 
eral white 
population 
16 years of 
age and 
over, 1900. 




Total. 


Male. 


Male. 


Continental United States 


23.7 


. 32.6 


23.0 






North Atlantlo 


32.7 
6.5 
16.0 
10.5 
25.1 


31.1 
6.9 
15.1 
10.5 
25.0 


31.8 


flonth Atlanth^r v 


5.3 


North Central 


24.8 


South Central .*. 


6.2 




29.8 







The male prisoners and the male population 15 years of age or over 
are taken because the presence of a larger proportion of females and 
children under 15 years of age in the native population than in the 
immigrant population would tend to throw undue emphasis upon the 
representation of immigrants in the prison population, which is 
derived chiefly from the male population 15 years of age and over. 
When the total prison population is compared with the total general 
population the ngures mdicate that the foreign-bom contributed t« 



Digitized by 



Google 



The Immigration Commission. 



the prison class in excess of their representation in the general popu- 
lation. When the prisoners are classified by sex, however, and the 
representation of tne foreign-bom in the male prison population is 
compared with their representation in the male general population 15 
years of age or over (as is done in the preceding table) it is found that 
the immigrant is more in evidence in the prison population than in 
the general population in the two southern ^oups of States only. 
But it is in these States that fewest immigrant prisoners were 
enumerated — 627 of the total, 12,945. In the country at large, and 
in the North Atlantic States, where the majority of the inmiigrant 
prisoners were enumerated, the hnmigrants formed a smaller part 
of the white mala prisoners of known nativity than of the wnite 
male general population 15 years of age or over. The enumeration 
of prisoners on June 30, 1904, therefore, gives no reason for believing 
f immigrant crime relatively greater in quantity than native crime; 
in fact, the figures make it appear somewhat less, and this does not 
take into consideration the probably more favorable showing which 
the foreign-bom would make were the population figures mose of 
1904 instead of 1900. 

A comparison of the relative proportions of native and foreign 
bom prisoners in 1890 and 1904 throws further light upon the matter. 
Such differences are shown in the following table: 

Table 2. — Per cent of native and foreign horn white prisoners among those of known 
nativity t 1904 and 1890, by geographic division. 





White prisoners of known na- 
tivity. 


DiTlslnn. 


Percent native. 


Per cent foreign- 
bom. 




1904. 


1890. 


1904. 


1^. 


Continental United States 


76.3 


71.8 


23.7 


28.8 






North AtlMitio. 


67.3 

To 

89.5 
74.9 


66.6 
89.6 
76.4 
83.9 
67.3 


32.7 
6.6 
16.0 
10.5 
26.1 


34.4 


South Atlantic t 


10.4 


North Central 


23.6 


South Central 


16.2 


Western 


32.8 







The striking feature of these figures is that they show the propor- 
tion of immigrant prisoners to have decreased. In 1904 a smaller 
?ercentage of the white prisoners were inmiigrants than in 1890. 
his was true not only in the United States as a whole, but in each 
of the five geographical divisions. 

Thus far the consideration has been of prisoners in the gross — 
that is, all prisoners, regardless of their offenses. Such grouping of 
all offenders, however, fails too much to distinguish the vanous 
degrees of crime to indicate verv clearly the character of the criminals. 

The census report classifies all prisoners as major or nainor offenders 
according to the apparent gravity of the offense committed. Of the 
prisoners enumerated throughout the United States on June 30, 1904, 
major offenders were more in evidence among natives than among 
immigrants, as is plainly shown in the table next submitted. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



TiLBLB 3.— JVcrftve and foreign horn white prUoners enumerated June SO, 1904, hy geth 
graphic atvmon and class of offender; per cent distribution. 



Division and class of oflendar. 


Per cent distribu- 
tion of white prls- 

ated, June 30, 
1904. 




Native. 


bom. 


Continental United States 


100.0 


100.0 






Major offeoders 


70.3 
, 29.7 


68.3 


MinO"" offenders -.,,,, ,,,,-,,„„„. .....I""""""" 


41.7 






North Atlantic... 


100.0 


100.0 






Major offenders 


5a 2 

43.8 


47.3 


Minor offenders * 


52.7 






South Atlantic 


100.0 


100.0 






Mi^or offenders 


76.1 
24.9 


74.6 


Minor offenrfprs . , . ^ . . 


25.4 






North Central 


100.0 


100.0 






Major offenders 


78.1 
21.9 


72.8 


Minor offenders --....,.,.. , 


27.2 






Soath Central 


100.0 


100.0 






Major offenders , 


88.0 
12.0 


91 9 


Minor offenders I...1.!.!!" 


8.1 






Western 


100.0 


WO.0 






Major offenders 


21.2^ 


^^ 


Minor offender^ r , 







The conclusion to be drawn from such figures is that of the two 
bodies of criminals— the immigrant and the native — the native (or 
American bom) exhibited in gjeneral a tendency to commit more 
serious crimes than did the immigrant. The criminality of the 
latter consisted more largely of the minor offenses that are in, con- 
siderable measure the result of congested city life. This is indicated 
by the larger proportion of minor offenders among immigrant prison- 
ers in the North Atlantic States than in any other section of the 
country, the immigrant population of that group of States being 
almost entirely resident in urban commimities. 

The conclusions arrived at in the preceding paragraph are corrob- 
orated bv the statistics of prisoners committea to penal institutions 
diuring the year 1904. Of the 33 States and Territories for which 
figures are shown there were only 10 in which the foreign-born fur- 
nished a larger proportion of the major offenders than of the minor 
offenders, wnile in 23 States and Territories the native-born were 
more conspicuous among the major than among the minor offenders. 
Comparii^ the representation of the foreign-bom among the white 
major and minor offenders committed to institutions during the year 
with their representation in the general white male population 15 
years of age or over at the time of the enumeration of population 
(1900), it is foimd that in general the foreim-born are more largely 
represented among the minor offenders tnan in the general male 
population, but they are less prominent among the major offenders 



Digitized by 



Google 



6 



The Immigration Commission. 



than in the general male population. That is, that of the graver 
crimes the immigrant commits a proportion smaller than his propor- 
tion of the population. 

Table 4. — Per cent of foretan-hom white persom among priwners of known nativity 
committed during 1904^ and in the general white population 15 years of age or over, 1900, 
by geographic division and class of offender. 





Per cent forelgn-boro— 


DiTislon. 


Among white prisoners 
of known nativity 
committed during 
1004. 


In general white popu- 
lation 15 years of age 
andoYer: 1900. 




Total. 


Major 
offend- 
ers- 


Minor 
offend- 
ers. 


Total. 


Male. 


Fe- 
mala. 


nontlnent^^l UnIM <?t«t^"? , . a 


28.8 


21.7 


30.1 


21.9 


28.0 


20.7 






North Atlantic 


35.0 
10.0 
20.2 
7.1 
27.3 


30.7 

16.7 
9.7 
24.8 


36.6 
11.6 
21.3 
6.0 
27.9 


30.8 
4.8 

23.3 
6.6 

27.4 


31.8 
6.3 

24.8 
6.2 

29.8 


29.8 


South Atlantic 


4.3 


North Central 


21.8 


South Central 


6.0 


Western 


24.1 







A further effect of Lnmigration may be discovered by observing 
the relation of persons of foreign parentage to crime in the United 
States. Such relation is shown in the foflowing table, which gives 
the percentage of persons of foreign parentage among the native 
white prisoners committed during 1904 and in the general native white 
population of 1900. 

Table 6. — Per cent of persons of foreign parentaae aTnong native white prisoners of 
known parentage committed during 1904, and in the native white general population, 
1900, by geographic division. 





Per cent of foreign par> 
entage«— 


Division. 


Among na- 
tive white 
prisoners of 
known par- 
entage com- 
mitted dur- 
ing 1904 


In native 
white gen- 
eral popu- 
laUon: 1900. 


Continental United States 


29.8 


18.8 






North Atlantic 


38.8 
4.6 

22.1 
4.8 

21.8 


26.8 


South Atlantic 


3.6 


North Central 


23.8 


South Central 


4.4 


Western 


21.8 







a Includes only those with both parents foreign-bom. 



This plainly indicates that the American-born children of immi- 
grants formed a larger proportion of the prison population than they 
did of the general population. In the United otates as a whole and 
in the North Atlantic^ South Atlantic, and South Central States, the 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



representation of the native-bom of foreign parentage in the native 
white prison population exceeded their representation in the native 
white general population. 

Data regarding the criminality of immigrant children are afforded 
by the census of juvenile delinquents. A comparison of immigrant 
juvenile delinquency with immigrant juvenile population is shown in 
Table 6. As tne figures for the former are those of 1904 and for the 
latter those of 1900, the comparison is lacking in exactness. Another 
difference in the figures exists in the age limits — those of delinquency 
being 7 and 21 years, while those of juvenile population are 10 and 19 
years. As 94 per cent of the juvenile dehnquents committed to insti- 
tutions were between the aces of 10 and 19, this difference does not 
greatly affect the value of tne figures. A more serious modification 
of their value is found in the rather heavy immigration from 1900 
to 1904, which doubtless somewhat augmented the immigrant juvenile 
population. 

Table 6. — Number and per cent of foreigrirbom persons among white juvenile delin- 
quents ofknovm mtivity enumerated June SO^ J 904, and in the general white popula- 
tion 10 to 19 years of age, 1900, by geographic division. 





White Jnyenile delin- 
quents of known na- 
tlvity enumerated 
Jane 30. 1904. 


Qeneral white population 10 
to 19 years of age: 1900. 


-DMOxm. 


Total. 


Foreign-bom. 


Total. 


Foreign-borxL 


, 


Num- 
ber. 


Per 
cent. 


Number. 


Per 
cent. 


Continental United States 


19,863 


1,874 


9.4 


13.502,427 


873,311 


6.5 






North Atlantic \,. 


10,016 

1,401 

6,920 

425 

1,101 


1,410 

20 

377 

10 

67 


14.1 
1.4 
6.4 
2.4 
6.3 


3,730,272 
1,483,339 
6,320,817 
2,261,131 
706,868 


476,635 
16.137 

304,768 
30,678 
46,093 


12.8 


Ponth AtH^nt'p 


1.1 


North Central i 


5.7 


Boath Central 


1.4 


Western 


6.4 







The &ures given in the table do not show, however, to quote the 
Census Keport, *'any markedly greater criminal tendency among the 
foreign-bom j^outh than among the native,'* and it must be remem- 
berea that tnis conclusion is based upon figures which do not take 
into account the probable increase in immigrant juvenile population 
due to the influx of immigrants from 1900 to 1904, so that the actual 
conditions were doubtless more favorable to the foreign-bom than 
the table above given would indicate. A more exact measure of 
juvenile delinquency is obtained by taking all juvenile delinquents 
committed to mstitutions during a definite jieriod of time. 

During the calendar year 1904, 10,177 white juvenile delinquents 
of known nativity were committed to institutions in all parts of the 
United States. Of this number 1,116 were immigrants. In the table 
next submitted the percentage which the foreign-bom formed of the 
total number of white juvenile delinquents and also of the general 
white population 10 to 19 years of age is shown. 



Digitized by 



Google 



8 



The Immigi'ation Commission. 



Table 7. — Ntmiber and ver cent of foreign-bom amonp white juvenile delinquents oom- 
mitted durina 1904, ana in the general white population 10 to 19 years of age, 1900 , by 
geographic division. 





White Juvenile delin- 
quents of known na- 
tivity committed 
during 1004. 


Oeoeral white popolatioo 10 
to 10 years oT age: 1000. 


DMaioa. 


Total. 


Foreign-bom. 


Total. 


Foroign-boni. 




Num- 
ber. 


Per 
oent. 


Number. 


Par 
oent. 


Continental United States 


10,177 


1,116 


11.0 


13,502,427 


873,311 


6.5 






North Atlantic 


5,157 

641 

3,422 

369 

588 


841 

24 

200 

7 
35 


16.3 
3.7 
6.1 
1.0 
6.0 


3,730,272 
1,483,330 
6.320,817 
2,261.131 
706.868 


476,635 
16,137 

304,768 
30.678 
45.003 


12.8 


South Atlantic 


1.1 


North Central 


5.7 


South Central 


1.4 


Western 


6.4 







The fibres given here show that in the country at large the immi- 
grant child formed a larger part of the juvenile delinquent class in 
1904 than he formed of the juvenile population in 1900. A partial 
explanation of this is found in the fact that the North Atlantic division 
contributed over one-half of the white juvenile delinquents and only 
a Uttle more than one-fourth of the white juvenile population. As 
immigrants form a larger part of the population in the North Atlantic 
States than in any other section of the country, the preponderance 
of juvenile delinquents committed to institutions in that section 
rather unduly affects the imrnigrant proportion for the country at 
large. It is doubtful, however, if this explanation adeauately accounts 
for the wide difference between imrnigrant luvenile aelinquency and 
immigrant juvenile population. It is probable that in 1904 the immi- 
grant child was committed to institutions for juvenile delinquents in 
excess of his representation in the juvenile population. 

The testimony of the census figures is not conclusive enough to 
show clearly the relation which immigration bears to the volume of 
crime in the United States, and at best it leaves the question of race 
influence untouched. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Chapter II. 
CHAEACTEE AlH) SCOPE OF nrVESTIGATIOlT. 

It was evident from the first that the Commission could not under" 
take an investigation to determine the amount of crime in the United 
States due in whole or in part to immigration. The inadequacies of 
the census statistics indicated clearly the barriers in the way of such 
an investigation. The investigation was therefore confined to a 
determination, in so far as possible, of the changes in the character 
of crime in the United States which had resulted from immigration and 
of the crimes peculiar to various immigrant races and nationalities. 

A small amount of entirely new data was collected by the Com- 
mission, covering 2,206 convictions in the New York City court of 
general sessions &om October 1. 1908, to June 30, 1909. fey special 
arrangement with this court tne race of every offender convicted 
during that period was recorded. So far as is known that was the 
first time that any court in the United States had made a record of 
the race of persons convicted in it. Thus, although the number of 
cases in which such data were obtained is small, me newness of the 
material renders it of special interest. 

All other data upon which the statistical part of this report is 
based were obtained from existing records, although in every case the 
data were subjected to special reclassification and tabulation, and 
analyzed with the relation of immigration to crime in view. After a 
general survey of the possible sources of criminal statistics in this 
country, the foUowing were selected as affording the greatest amount 
of data for the purpose of the Commission: 
I. Court records. 
n. Records of penal institutions. 
III. Records of arrests by the poUce of various cities. 

An endeavor to obtain data from these several kinds of sources 
revealed the fact that satisfactory information could be secured 
from only a few locahties. The result, therefore, was that records 
which could be used in the analysis of the relation of immigrants to 
crime were obtained from the following sources only: 

1. Court records: 

id) New York City magistrates' courts, 1901 to 1908, inclusiye. 
6) County and, supreme court of New York State, 1907 and 1908. 
c) New York City court of general sessions (data specially recorded for 
the Commission), October 1, 1908, to Jime 30, 1909. 

2. Records of penal institutions: 

(a) Commitments to penal institutions in the State of Massachusetts, 
October 1, 1908, to September 30, 1909. 

(Jb) Ali^i prisoners in penal institutions throughout the United States in 
1908 (data collected by the Bureau of Immigration and Naturali- 
zation). 

79340^— VOL 36—11 2 t 



Digitized by VjOOQiC 



10 The Immigration Commission. 

3. Records of arrests by city police: 

(a) ArreetB in Chicago (the police reports of no other large city contained 
records of arrest by nationality, or country of birth, and crime), 1905 
to 1908, inclusive. 

From these sources records of 1,179,677 criminal cases were 
obtained. The dissimilarity of the sources, however, detracts from 
their strict comparability, and the figures from each source must 
be subjected to separate analysis. The distribution of these 1,179,677 
cases, by character and source, is as follows: 

1. Court convictions: 

New York court of general sessions, October 1, 1908 to 
June 30, 1909 2,262 

€k>unty and supreme courts of New York State, January 

1, 1907, to December 31, 1908 12,897 

15, 15» 

2. Children's court cases: 

Convicted or committed to institutions. New York City 
children's courts, 1906 and 1908 26.709 

3. Police court cases: 

Held for further trial or committed to institutions, New York 
City magistrates' courts, January 1, 1901, to December 31, 1908 . 785, 824 

4. Police arrests: 

Chicago, 1905 to 1908 307,479 

6. Commitments to penal institutions: 

All Massachusetts penal institutions, October 1, 1908, to Sep- 
ten^ber 30, 1909 31,653 

6. Alien prisoners: 

All penal institutions in the United States, 1908 12, 853 

Total 1,179,677 

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES. 

As all the material was either copied from the original records or 
taken from printed reports in which it was not classified in a 
manner admitting of the analysis desired, it was necessary to 
specially classify and tabulate all the data collected. A classification 
and a tabulation following those made by the Census Bureau (with 
which the public is most familiar) seemed madeauate for the purposes 
of the analysis planned. Something more clearly indicating the 
character of the crimes committed appeared desirable. Elspecially 
was this true of the grouping together of various offenses which must 
be made in the analysis of a large number of cases. The customary 
classification of crimes into offenses against chastity, against public 
poUcy, against the person, and against property, wnile sufficiently 
mdicating the immediate effect of the criminal act upon society, does 
not clearty enough bring out the character of the offender. A modifi- 
cation was* therefore made of the classification of crimes employed 
bv the Census Bureau, for the purpose of indicating more nearly the 
character of the offenders themselves. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 11 

This reclassification of crimes involved a large amount of labor 
and a careful perusal of the offense of every offender. It is 
believed, however, that the results justify this expenditure of labor 
and this departure from customary classifications. The new classi- 
fication retains two of the grouns of crimes employed in the census 
classification (offenses against cnastity and offenses against public 
poUcy), but regroups the remaining onenses into '^gainnil offenses," 
*' offenses of personal violence, '' ''unclassified offenses,'* and ''offenses 
insufficiently defined." 

In this revised classification the "gainful offenses" consist of 
blackmail and extortion, burglarv, forgery and fraud, larcenv and 
receiving stolen property, and robbery. All of these are predatory 
offenses, committed for purposes of gain. 

"Offenses of personal violence" are these: Abduction and kid- 
naping, assault, homicide, and rape. 

The group of offenses "against public policy" and that "against 
chastity" include all those crimes placed m them by the customary 
classification, the latest United States census grouping having been 
employed as a standard in classifying these crimes. 

"Unclassified offenses" consist of those which do not admit of 

S roper inclusion in any of the other four croups, although of clear 
efinition. Such crimes are abandonment, abortion, arson, attempted 
suicide, cruelty to children, and maUcious mischief. 

In addition to these crimes there were found some which were so 
vaguely defined as to afford no clue to their actual character. Such 
are offenses appearing in the records as "felonies" and "misde- 
meanors," which might, were their true nature known, belong to any 
of the five groups above enumerated. Because of their unknown 
character, these offenses have been omitted from the text tables. 
Since they might modify the numbers of the distinct crime groups 
were their actual significance known, they could not properly be 
retained in the totals upon which the proportions of these groups are 
based. In the general tables, however, they have been retained as 
"offenses insufficiently defined." 

The difference between the customary classification of crime and 
that employed in this report is shown in the following comparison of 
the two: 

CLABSinCATION BMPLOTSD CU8TOMABY CLASSIFICATION. 

IN THIS KBPORT. 

Gainful offenses — Offenses asalost property (except arson, trespass, malicioos mlschieOf 

to which is added robbery. 
Offenses of personal yiotonce ■- Offenses against the person (except abandonment, abortion, cruelty to 

children, attempted suicide, and robbery). 
Offenses against public policy » Offenses against public policy. 
Offenses against chastity ■- Offenses against chastity. 
Unclassified offenses *■ Offenses against property and against the person not Included in other 

groups of the new classmcation. 

Although this reclassification of offenses has been employed in the 
analvsis of the data, general tables have also been made according 
to the customary^ classification of offenses, arranged to conform as 
nearly as possible to the United States census tables of crime, thus 
rendering them comparable, in classification of offenses, with other 
statistics. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



12 The Immigratictti Commission. 

OLASSIFIGATIOK OF OFFENDERS. 

In the data obtained from the several sources the foreign-bom 
offenders are divided into race or nationality groups. The records 
of convictions in the New York court of general sessions and of aliens 
detained in the penal institutions of the United States are by race. 
Those of arrests made by Chicago poUce are by '^nationality," this 
term being employed by the Chicago poUce department to mdicate 
the geographical, rather than the political, origin of offenders. AU 
other records are by coimtry of birth. 

A division of wider scope is also used in the tabulation of the data. 
Offenders have been grouped as native-bom and foreign-bom. This 
is for the purpose of comparing the entire immigrant group with the 
entire American-bom group. 

The incompleteness of tne records sometimes made it impossible 
to determine not only the race or country of birth, but also the fact 
of native or foreign birth. Such cases have necessarily been omitted 
from the figures upon which comparisons of immigrant and native 
criminality are based, although they have been retained in the general 
tables. 

METHOD OF ANALYSIS. 

As it was impossible from the data obtained to arrive at any 
satisfactory conclusions regarding the relation of immigration to the 
volume of crime in the United States or in any section thereof, the 
analysis of the material was confined entirely to an examination of 
the differences in the character of the criminality of immigrants and 
natives (and the children of immigrants and the children of natives). 
The central feature of the investigation was, therefore, the answering 
of this question: How does the criminality of the immigrant differ 
from that of the native ? This resolved itself into an analysis of the 
relative frequency or per cent distribution of the several crimes and 
classes of crime among the various nativity groups of offenders. 
Thus if a given offense or group of offenses formed a larger proportion 
of the aggregate crimes committed by immigrants than oi those 
committ^Sr by natives, it was plain that this offense was, so far as the 
data involved were concerned, more characteristic of iiamigrant 
criminality than of native criminaUty. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Chapter III. 
GEFEBAL SUMMAET OF EESVITS. 

Certain eumulative evidence has resulted from the inquiry. Sta- 
tistics from various sources have testified to similar conditions, and 
while the results obtained from the analysis of the widely different 
sets of data are not identical, at some pomts they are in agreement. 
This common testimony may be briefly summarized to bring out 
the most important and universal results of the investigation. 

These results fall into fourgroups : those which concern (1) American- 
bom persons and all immigrants grouped together without regard 
to race or nationality; (2) the American-bom diildren of immigrants, 
or the "second generation;" (3) distinct races or nationalities; ana 
(4) aliens, or imnaturaUzed immigrants. 

1. Immigrants and Natives. 

Hoarding the criminalitv of immigrants and natives, all data 
analyzed agree upon the following points : 

(a) The class of offenses designated as "gainful" forms a larger 
proportion of native than of immigrant crimmality. 

(o) The aggregate "offenses of personal vi6lence'' and the aggre- 
gate "offenses against public policy" form larger percentages of 
immigrant than of native crime. 

(c) The aggregate "offenses against chastity" compose very 
slightlv different proportions of the total criminality of immigrants 
and of natives. The only striking difference is found in the records 
of the arrests made by the Chicago police during the period from 
1905 to 1908, inclusive, which show 5.2 per cent of the arrests of 
natives to have been for these crimes and 3.3 per cent of those of 
immigrants. The data from two of the other four sources show 
these crimes to form the same percentage of native and immigrant 
criminality, while in one of the remaining two sets of data the native 
percentage slightly exceeds the foreign percentage, and in the other 
the foreign percentage is slightly in excess of the native. 

When analysis is made of some of the specific offenses within 
these four general classes of crime, a number of exceptions to these 
rules appear. In the main, however, various specific offenses bear 
the same relations to immigrant and native cnminality as do the 
crime groups to which they belong. 

Detailed analysis of the criminality of immigrants and natives is 
made in Chapters IV, V, and VI. 

2. The Second Generation. 

One of the most important facts established by the inyestigation 
concerns the American-bom children of immigrants — the "second 
generation. '^ While the data upon which the study of this phase 

13 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



14 



The Immigration G>mmi8si(Hi. 



of the problem is based are too Umited to permit of wide generaUza- 
tion, the results obtained from the analysis are of value. The 
records of convictions in the New York court of general sessions 
during the period from October 1, 1908, to June 30, 1909, and of 
all commitments to Massachusetts penal institutions, except those 
to the State farm, during the vear ending September 30, 1909, 
form the basis of this analysis of the criminal tendencies of the second 
generation. 

From these records it appears that a clear tendency exists on the' 
part of the second generation to differ from the first or inunigrant 
generation in the character of its criminaUty. It also appears 
that this difference is much more frequently in the direction of the 
criminality of the American-bom of nonimmigrant parentage than 
it is in the opposite direction. This means tnat the movement of 
second generation crime is away from the crimes peculiar to immi- 
grants and toward those of the American of native parentage. 
Sometimes this movement has carried second generation criminahty 
even beyond that of the native-born of native parentage. 

Of the second generation groups subjected to this comparison, 
one maintains a constant adherence to the general rule above 
referred to, while all the others at some point fan to follow it. This 
unique group is the IrLsh second generation. In the records of the 
New York court of general sessions employed, the classification of 
foreign-born offenders is by race and of native-born by race of father. 
In those of the Massachusetts penal institutions, it is by country 
of birth of the foreign-born, and by country of birth of father of 
the native-born. Thus the term "Irish second generation'' does 
not mean exactly the same thing when applied to the data from 
those two sources. In the one it means American-born persons 
whose fathers are of the Irish race. In the other it means American- 
born persons whose fathers were born in Ireland. The ethnic 
character of these two groups is, however, probably; the same. Bear- 
ing in mind the different classification employed in the two sets of 
data, the same designation may, for convenience, be appUed to these 
two second generation groups. 

The data upon which this conclusion is based regarding the ten- 
dency to assimilation of the Irish second generation are summarized 
in the following table of percentages: 

Table 8. — Deviation of the Irish second generation from the immigrant : New York coturt 
of general sessions and Massachusetts penal institutions. 

CLASSES OF CRIME. 





Gainful 
offenses. 


Oflenses 
of per- 
sonal 

violence. 


Oflenses 
againat 
public 
policy. 


Oflenses 
against 
chasUty. 


New York court of general sessions: 
Irish- 

Immigrant 


60.5 
78.0 
79.7 

4.4 

10.0 
20.6 


29.1 
12.3 
9.8 

3.0 
3.6 
5.3 


3.5 
6.0 

8.9 

90.0 
83.5 
68.0 




Second eeneration 




Native white of native father . 




Massachusetts penal institutions: 
Irish- 

Immigrant 


1.1 


Second generation 


1.6 


Native-l)om of native father 


3.8 







Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



16 



Tablb 8. — Deviation of the Irish second generation from the immigrant: New York court 
oj general sessions and Massachusetts penal institutions — Continued. 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 





Burglary. 


and 
fraud. 


Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen 
property. 


Robbery. 


New York court of general sessions: 
Irish- 
Immigrant ..X......... 


9.3 
26.0 
20.3 

9.4 
1.6 
3.2 


0.0 
L3 
6.3 

.1 
.2 

.8 


47.7 
49.7 
51.4 

3.8 
8.1 
15.9 


8.6 


Second generation 


1.0 


Native white of native father 


2.4 


Massachusetts penal Institutions: 
Irish- 

Immigrant 


.1 


Second generation 


.8 


Native-born of native father 


.7 







OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 





Abduc- 
tion. 


Simple 
assault 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


New Yorlc court of general sessions: 
Irish- 
Immigrant 


L2 

.0 

.7 


26.6 
ILO 
7.9 

2.2 
3.4 
4.7 




2.8 
LO 
.5 

.03 
.07 
.21 


0.0 


Seconal generation 




.3 


Native white of native father 




.7 


Massachusetts penal institutions: 
Irish- 
Immigrant 


0.71 
.11 
.23 


.00 


Second generation 




.00 


Native-bom of native father 




.11 









CERTAIN OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 





Dis- 
orderly 
conduct. 


Drank- 
enness. 


Qamlng. 


Va. 
grancy. 


New Yorlc court of general sessions: 
Irish- 
Immigrant 






1.2 
2.7 
3.6 

.06 
.22 
.4 




Second generation '. 








Native white of native father ' 






Massachusetts penal institutions: 
Irish- 

Immigrant 


2.7 
2.2 
2.6 


82.4 
75.2 
53.5 


2.5 


Second generation 


3.1 


Native bom of native father 


4.4 







CRIMES OF PROSTITUTION. 



Crimes 
of prosti- 
tution. 



New York court of eeneral sessions 
Massachusetts penal institutions: 
Irish- 

Immlmmt 

Second generation 

Native-bom of native father. . . 



(•) 



0.1 
.2 
.8 



• Insufficient data for comparison. 



Digitized by 



Google 



16 The Immigration Commission. 

By comparing the percentage of the native-born of native father 
with the percentages of the Irish immigrant and second generation 
groups, in each trio of percentages, the divergence of the second 
generation from the first (or immigrant) will be seen to be always in 
the direction of the percentage of the native-born of native father. 

The other second generations compared in this manner with cor- 
responding immigrant groups are, in the case of the data from the 
New York court of general sessions, the EngUsh, German, Hebrew, 
and Italian, and in the case of the data from Massachusetts penal 
institutions, the Canadian, English, German, and Scotch. Each of 
these fails at some point to follow the rule of deviation from the 
corresponding first generation in the direction of the native-born of 
native father, but these exceptions are fewer in number than the 
cases of adherence to the rule. 

3. Races and Nationalities. 

Because of the presence of many diflferent races in the immigrant 
group, it is of importance to separate this group into its constituent 
elements. Could classification of all immigrant criminals be made 
by race, such a separation would aflFord means of accurate analysis. 
But records of crime are not kept by race of the offender, the classi- 
fication of foreign-born persons being almost universally by country 
of birth. One set of data has been obtained which gives a true 
racial classification. This consists of only 2,262 recor(fa of convic- 
tions in the New York court of general sessions, which were reported 
by an agent of the Immigration Commission aetailed to attendance 
at that court. All other records of crime which form the data of 
this analysis are by country, or other geographical division, of birth. 
In discussing these data the term '^nationaUty" has been employed 
to indicate such poUtical or geographical origm. As this frequently 
appears to be synonomous with race, distinction of the two terms 
has not always been made. It is well to bear in mind, however 
the fact that only a small part of the data shows distinct and accur- 
ate race groups. 

From the records analyzed, a number of coincident relations of 
various nationalities to crime appear. The more striking of these 
may be summarized to show wnich crimes and classes of crime 
belong more distinctly to the aggregate criminality of well-defined 
nationalities. This is done by ooserving those instances in which a 
nationality has the highest percentage of a specific crime or class of 
crime in several sets or data. 

The data forming the basis of this comparison of races and nation- 
alities consist of criminal records from the following sources; 

1. New York City magistrates' courts. 

2. New York court of general sessions. 

3. County and supreme courts of New York State, 

4. Chicago police department. 

5. Massachusetts penal institutions. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 17 

SUMMARY BY CRIME. 

The aggregate gainful offenses form, in three of the five sets of 
data, a larger percentage of the crimes of persons of American birth 
than of those of any other group of oflFenders. 

Of the aggregate offenses of personal violence, the ItaUan percent- 
age is highest in four of the five sets of data. 

The group of offenses against public poUcy composes a larger per- 
centage of the crimes of ItaUans in two sets of data than of those of 
any other nationality. In one of the other three the Scotch per- 
centage ranks first and the Irish second; in another the Irish per- 
centage is greatest and the Scotch second in rank; while in the third 
the Irish percentage is first in rank and the Scotch fourth. 

The a^regate offenses against chastity are shown by the figures 
from two of the five sources to occupy a larger place in the crimes of 
the French than in those of any of the other nationahties. 

When inquiry is made concerning the relations of the different 
nationalities to the various offenses composing these four classes of 
crime, a number of instances are found wnere the highest percentage 
shown by the figures from several sources belongs to the same 
nationaUty. 

Blackmail and extortion, — ^While the number of cases of blackmail 
and extortion is not large, the figures from four of the five sources 
of data throw the Itahan commission of these crimes into the fore- 

f round. In the records of commitments to Massachusetts prisons 
ut one commitment for extortion and none for blackmail are found. 
This single case is that of a native-born person of native parentage. 
In the four other sets of data, however, the percentage which cases 
of blackmail and extortion form of the total crimes of Italians is in 
excess of that which they form of the total crimes of any of the other 
race or nationahty groups appearing in the records. 

Burglary, — ^This occurs witn greater relative frequency among the 
crimes of American-born persons, in three of the five sets of data, 
than among those of any other group of offenders. 

Robbery. — In two of the same three sets of data this likewise 
forms a larger percentage of the criminahty of Americans than of 
the criminafity of any other nationality. 

Larceny ana receivina stolen property, — For these the highest per- 
centage m two sets of data is that of the Russians. The figures 
from one of the other sources give the Russian percentage as third 
in rank, being exceeded by the American and English percent ages. 

Abduction and hidnaping. — In only three of the five sets of data 
do a sufficient number of cases of abduction and kidnaping appear 
to permit of satisfactory comparison of race or nationaUty groups of 
offenders. In two of these three the ItaUan percentage of these 
crimes exceeds that of every other race or nationality, fix the third 
the Greek percentage is slightly greater than the ItaUan, which 
ranks secona. It may be observed tnat in the two sets of data which 
give the ItaUans the highest percentage of abduction and kidnaping 
no group of Greek offenders appears. 

Sormcide, — Of aU the various race and nativity groups the Italian 
stands out sharply in the analysis of each of the five sets of data as 
having the largest percentage of homicide among its crimes. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



18 



The Immigration Commission. 



Rape. — ^This forms a larger percentage of the crimes of Italians in 
three sets of data than of those of any other group of offenders. In 
one of the remaining two sets of data the Itahan percentage is second 
in rank. 

Violation of city ordiriances. — ^The reports of the New York City 
magistrates' courts and of the Chicago police de^rtment alone con- 
tain records of the violation of city ordinances. With regard to these 
offenses the data from these two sources *do not agree upon the rank 
of the various nationaUties, but a striking similarity is found. In 
Chicago the Greeks have a larger percentage of violations of citv ordi- 
nances than any other nationaUty. In the Boroughs of Manhattan 
and the Bronx in New York the same thing is found. When, how- 
ever, Greater New York is substituted for these two boroughs, it 
becomes impossible to show the Greek percentage, as the records of 
the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and Kichmond do not show any 
figures for the Greeks. Of the nationaUties appearing in the records 
of all five boroughs of Greater New York, the Italian stands highest 
in percentage, while the percentage of the Russians is second in rank. 
By taking the highest percentage found in the figures for Manhattan 
and the JBronx and the highest two appearing in the figures for 
Greater New York the following striking similarity to the Chicago 
data is brought out: 

Table 9. — Violation of city ordinances compared with all offenses: New York City 
magistrates' courts and Cnicago police arrests. 



New York. 


Chicago. 


Nationality. 


Per cent 

of all 
offenses. 


Nationality. 


Percent 

of all 
offenses. 


Greek (Manhattan and the Bronx) 


86.0 
39.6 
32.3 


Greek 


30.8 


Italian (Greater New York) 


Russian 


17.7 


Russian (Greater New York) 


Italian 


13.5 




1 





Crimes of prostitution, — In only two of the five sets of data has a 
comparison of the various groups of offenders been made with respect 
to the place of crimes of prostitution in their criminality. These two 
sets of data are fairly comparable, being the records of cases in the 
New York City magistrates' or police courts, and of arrests by the 
pohce in the city of Chicago. Each of these shows crimes of prosti- 
tution to compose a considerably larger percentage of the total offenses 
of the French than of those of any other nationahty. 

SUMMARY BY NATIONALrTT. 

The races or nationaUties which thus stand out prominently in these 
records of crime as exhibiting clearly defined crinunal characteristics 
are these: 

American (including all native-horn persons y hoth white and colored) . — 
In three of the five sets of data the aggregate gainful offenses form a 
higher percentage of the crimes of Americans than those of any other 

fpoup of offenders. The highest percentages of the specific crime of 
urglary in these three sets of data also belong to the American-born. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 19 

The three sets of data thus agreeing are those from the New York 
City magistrates' courts, the county and supreme courts of New York 
State, and the Chicago police department. In the first and third of 
these the American percenta^ge of robbery is also greater than that 
of any other race or nationaUty group of offenders. 

French. — In the data from the New York City magistrates' courts 
and the police department of Chicago natives of France have a higher 
percentage than any other persons of the aggregate oflFenses a^auist 
chastity and of the specific '* crimes of prostitution" belonging to 
that group of offenses. 

Greek, — ^The records of the city magistrates' courts of the Boroughs 
of Manhattan and the Bronx in New York, and of the Chicago police 
department, show the highest percentage of violations of city ordi- 
nances to be that of persons Dom in Greece. Comparison of the 
Greelts with other nationalities in the records of the city mamstrates' 
courts of all five boroughs of Greater New York is not possible, as the 
courts of three of the borouglis show no separate Greek group in their 
records. 

Italian, — ^The ItaUans have the highest percentages of the aggregate 
offenses of personal violence shown by the data from the New York 
City magistrates' courts, the New York court of general sessions, the 
county and supreme courts of New York State, and the penal insti- 
tutions of Massachusetts. The Chicago poUce records alone show a 
different condition ; in them the Italian percentage is exceeded by those 
of the Lithuanians and Slavonians," neither of which nationahties 
appears as a separate group in the data from the four other sources. 
Certain specific crimes of personal violence also belong distinctively 
to Italian criminality. Abduction and kidnaping in the figures from 
the New York City magistrates' courts and tne county and supreme 
courts of New York State form a larger percentage of the crimes of 
ItaUans than of those of any other group of ofl'enders. 

In the Chicago figures the Italians rank second in percentage of 
these crimes, being very slightly exceeded by the Greeks. In the 
remainmg two sets of data no comparison of nationahties is made 
with regard to these crimes, because of the small number of cases. 
Of blackmail and extortion the Italians also have the hi;j;hest per- 
centage in the four sets of data having a sufficient number of cases to 
make comparison possible. The Massachusetts figures have only one 
case, and therefore afford no field for such comparison. In all five 
sets of data the Italians have the highest percentage of homicide. 
Rape hkewise forms a higher percentage of the crimes of Italians than 
of those of any other nationality in the statistics of the New York 
City magistrates' courts, the New York court of general sessions, and 
the penal institutions of Massachusetts. In the county and supreme 
court records of New York State the Italian percentage of rape is 
second in rank, being very slightly exceeded by the German, while in 
the Chicago figures the Greeks report a higher percentage. 

Of the aggregate offenses against pubfic policy, the Italian per- 
centage exceeds all others in two sets of data — those from the New 
York court of general sessions and the county and supreme courts 
of New York State. Of violations of city ordinances shown in the 

tt " Slavonians " is a term employed by the Chicago police department to designate 
pereons bom in Croatia or Slavonia. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



20 The Immigration Commission. 



records of the city magistrates' courts of Greater New York, the 
Italian percentage is greatest, while of the same offenses shown in the 
records of arrests by the Chicago police, the Italian percentage ranks 
third. 

Russian, — Of the aggregate gainful offenses the percentage of per- 
sons born in Russia ranks second in those three sets of data in which 
the American percentage of these crimes is first in rank — those from 
the New York City magistrates' courts, the county and supreme 
courts of New York State, and the Chicago police department. The 
Russian percentage of the specific crimes of larceny and receiving 
stolen property is also striking. In the figures of the New York City 
magistrates' courts it is third in rank, being exceeded by the American 
and English; in the figures of the county and supreme courts of New 
York State it is greater than all other percentages. Further than this, 
the Russian percentage of violations of city ordinances is second in 
rank in the data from the New York City magistrates' courts (Greater 
New York) and the Chicago police department. 

THE CrriES OF NEW YORK AND CHICAGO. 

An interesting comparison can be made of crime in the cities of 
New York and Chicago as revealed by the records of cases in the city 
magistrates' or poUce courts of the former and of arrests made by the 
police of the latter. While the New York fibres cover the eight 
years from 1901 to 1908, inclusive, and the Chicago figures only the 
four year? from 1905 to 1908, inclusive, there is a similarity in the 
nationalities of the two cities having the highest percentages of each 
of the four well-defined classes of cnme. 

Of the aggregate gainful offenses, the largest percentage is that of 
the native-Dom, whUe the percentage of the Russians is next in rank. 
The figures from both cities show the same relation of these two 
groups of offenders. 

The ag^egate offenses of personal violence form a larger percentage 
of the crmies of Italians in New York than of those of any other 
nationaUty. In the Chicago figures the Italian percentage is third 
in rank, being exceeded by the percentages of the Lithuanians and the 
Slavonians. Neither of these nationahties, however, is shown in the 
New York records, being inclutled (if they appear at all) in the group 
of '* other foreign" offenders. 

Of the three nationalities having the highest three percentages of 
the aggregate offenses against public poUcy m New York and Chicago, 
two are common to both cities, the Irish and the Scotch. In New 
York the Scotch rank first and the Irish second; in Chicago the Irish 
rank second and the Scotch third, the first place being occupied by 
the Chinese, who do not appear as a separate group in the New York 
figures. 

The highest percentage of the aggregate offenses against chastity in 
each city is that of the French. In Chicago the Russian percentage 
ranks second and in New York third, being exceeded by that of 
persons bom in Germany. 

With regard to some of the specific crimes appearing in these four 
crime groups certain Ukenesses are also found. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 21 

BlMkmail and extortion, — These form a larger proportion of the 
crimes of Italians in both cities than of the crimes of any other 
nationaUty. 

Bvrglary. — In both cities this appears with greatest relative fre- 
quency among the crimes of American-bom offenders. 

Larceny and receHmng stolen property. — These form a larger per- 
centage of the crimes of Americans m New York than of those of any 
other nationality, while the percentages of the English and the Rus- 
sians are respectively second and third in rank. In Chicago the 
Russian percentage stands first in rank, and the American second; 
the English percentage here ranks tenth. 

Robbery. — Of this crime the American percentage is greatest in 
both cities. 

Of the various offenses of personal violence only three present 
striking likenesses in the relations of nativity groups in the two cities. 
These are abduction and kidnaping, violent assault, and homicide. 

Abduction and Icidnaping. — ^These form a larger percentage of 
Italian crimes in New York than of those of any other nationality. 
In Chicago the Italian percent^e stands second in rank, being 
slightly exceeded by that of the Greeks. In the New York figures, 
however, no separate Greek group is to be found. 

Violent assault, — ^The highest percentage of this crime shown by 
the New York figures is that of the ItaUans. In Chicago the Sla- 
vomans and Lithuanians, neither of which nationahties appears in 
the New York records, have higher percentages than the ItaUans, 
although no other nationaUty has. 

Homicide. — ^This is, in each of the two cities, relatively more 
frequent among the crimes of Italians than among those of any 
other group of offenders. 

The violation of city ordinances and vagrancy are the onljr offenses 
against public poUcy showing notable similarities in the nationahties 
having the highest precentages of them in the two cities. 

Violations of city ordinances. — ^The nationahties having the largest 
proportions of violations of city ordinances is not the same in both 
cities, but when the statistics for the boroughs of Manhattan and the 
Bronx are employed in place of the figures for Greater New York, as 
was done on pa^e 18, the Greek is found to exceed all other national- 
ities. This is the nationaUty whose percentage outranks aU others 
in the Chicago figures. Of the nationalities found in the records of 
the five boroughs of Greater New York, the Italian ranks first and 
the Russian second. The Chicago figures show the Russian percent- 
age to be second in rank (being exceeded by the Greek percentage) 
and the Italian third. 

Vagrancy. — In New York vagrancy forms a larger percentage of 
the offenses of the English than of those of anv other nationaUty. 
In Chicago the American percentage equals the English, but aU 
other percentages are less than these. 

Offenses CMainst chastity . — Comparison of New York and Chicago 
has already been made (page 18) with respect to crimes of prostitu- 
tion, the only offenses against chastity subjected to special analysis. 
Beyond the ract, however, that these crimes are found to occur with 
greatest relative frequency among the offenses of the French, it 
may be noted that the Russians stand out rather prominently in 
botn cities. In Chicago the Russian percentage of these crimes is 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



22 



The Immigration Commission. 



next in rank to that of the French; in New York tlie Russian per- 
centage ranks third, being exceeded only by the French and German 

It will De of interest here to present tables showing the percentage 
of each crime and class of crime belongi^ to the various nationalities 
found in the records of New York and Cnicago, as it will make pos- 
sible the further comparison of the two cities without seeking the 
data in the separate sections of this report in which fuller analysis of 
the figures is made. In the following tables only those nationalities 
appearing in the data from both cities are shown: 

Tablx 10. — Natvmalities compared with regard to percentage ofcrimu9: New Ybrl City 
magistrates* courts ana Chicago police arrests. 

CLASSES OF CRIMES. 



Nationality. 


Gainful offenses. 


Offenses of personal 
violence. 


Offenses against 
public policy. 


chasUty. 




New York. 


Chicago. 


New York. Chicago. 


New York. 


Chicago. 


NewYwk. 


Chicaga 


American 

English 

French 

German 

Irish 


lai 

8.1 
4.3 
7.7 
4.4 


14.8 
la? 
10.5 
11.1 
5.6 


3.9 
3.5 
1.6 
4.3 
8.7 
7.3 
3.3 
2.6 


4.6 
&0 
4.8 
6.6 
5.6 
10.6 
6.4 


84.9 

87.4 
89.7 
86.2 
91.2 
84.9 
86.9 
91.3 


73.8 
79.0 
71.5 
77.0 
85.6 
74.0 
09.6 
8&2 


a6 
.5 
4.1 
1.2 
.3 
.8 
.9 
.3 


5.1 
3.8 

11.6 
2.» 
1.4 


Italian 

Russian 

Scotch 


6.4 
8.3 
6.5 


11.4 
12.4 
^6 


3.0 
9.0 

L8 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 



NationaUty. 


Blackmail and 
extortion. 


Burglary. 




Larceny and 

receiving stolen 

property. 


Robbery. 




New Chi- 
Yortc. cago. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


American 


a 03 a 013 

.0») 

.08 

.02 .010 
.01 ; .009 
.17 1 .068 
.02 1 054 

•"i 


2.0 
1.0 

.6 
L3 

.7 
1.4 
1.5 

.5 


2.9 
1.3 

.8 
1.7 

.6 
L2 
1.0 
1.1 


an 

.15 
.05 
.14 
.02 
.03 
.07 
.09 


1.8 
1.5 
LI 
L6 

.7 
2.1 
L5 

.6 


7.4 
6.6 
3.3 
6.0 
3.4 
4.4 
&4 
4.7 


8.3 
6.8 
7.8 
6.9 
3.7 
7.0 
9.2 
4.2 


a6 

!3 
.8 


1.7 


English 


1. 1 


French 


.9 


German 


.8 


Irish 


.7 


Italian 


1.0 


Russian 


.7 


Scotch 


.7 







OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 



NaUonaUty. 


Abduction and 
kidnaping. 

New Chl- 
York. 1 cago. 


Assault, 
simple. 


Assault, 
violent. 


Homicide. 


Rape. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


New 
York. 


Chi- 
cago. 


A merican 


0.04 0.042 
.02 . .086 

.05 

.04 I .036 

(«) 

. 15 1 . 190 
.08 1 .054 

.02 ! 

1 


2.4 
2.2 
1.0 
2.7 
2.4 
3.0 
21 
L7 


2.2 

2.6 
2.1 
3.6 
3.2 
3.1 
4.0 
2.7 


0.8 
.6 
.4 

.9 
.8 
3.1 
.7 
.6 


1.2 
L2 
1.5 
L6 
L3 
3.5 
L5 
LI 


0.6 
.5 
.2 
.5 
.5 
.7 
.3 
.2 


0.9 
.8 
.9 

LI 
.9 

3.1 
.5 
.8 


0.13 
.15 
.02 
.13 
.03 
.35 
.09 
.U 


0.31 


Enellsh 


.34 


French 


.329 




.326 


Irish 


.26 


Italian 


.63 


Russian. 


.34 


Scotch 


.28 











a Leas than 0.01 per cent 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



23 



Table 10. — Natuynalities compared with regard to percentage of crime: New York City 
magistrates' courts and Chicago police arrests — Continued. 



CERTAIN OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 






NationaUty. 


Disorderly conduct. 


Vagrancy, truancy, 
and incorrigibility. 


Violation of oorponh 
tion ordinances. 




New York. 


Chicago. 


New York. 


Chicago. 


New York. 


Chicago. 


Ameriran 


33.9 
23.6 
59.1 
28.2 
23.9 
22.6 
32.1 
16.9 


65.7 
66.6 
66.5 
61.3 
76.6 
48.3 
44.2 
74.6 


4.8 
6.8 
2.8 
6.2 
6.4 
L6 
L3 
6.8 


LO 
1.0 
.3 
.3 
.5 
.5 
.6 
.9 


6.6 
4.9 
3.6 
7.4 
2,4 
39.6 
32.3 
4.7 


6.1 


English 


6.4 


French 


10.3 




10.4 


Irish 


5.7 


Italian 


13.6 


R^i99i|in . , . 


17.7 


Scotch 


6.9 







CRIMES OF PROSTITUTION. 





Nationality. 


Crimes of prostitution. 




New York.« 




American ... 


0.4 
.3 

3.6 
.9 
.1 
.6 
.7 
.1 


4.4 


English 


2.7 


yrench 


10.3 


German 


2.1 


Irish 


1.1 


Italian 


2.3 


Russian 


7.9 


Scotch 


1.4 







• The percentages of New York are those for "disorderly house" cases. 
THE STATES OF NEW YORK AND MASSACHUSETTS. 

While wholly comparable data have not been obtained from the 
States of New York and Massachusetts, and detailed comparison of 
crime in the two States can not profitably be made, a striking simi- 
larity is found in the statistics of commitments to Massacnusetts 
penal institutions for offenses of personal violence and of convictions 
of hke offenses in the county and supreme courts of New York. 

The New York records show that seven of the eight foreign nation- 
ality groups appearing in them have higher percentages of the offenses 
of personal violence tnan the native-bom, while in me Massachusetts 
records nine of the eleven foreign nationality groups shown have 
higher percentages than the American-born. An interesting hkeness 
exists in the immigrant groups of the two sets of data whidi exceed 
the native group in percentage of the offenses of personal violence. 



Digitized by 



Google 



24 



The Immigration Commission. 



The following arrangement of the various groups in descending 
order of percentages makes this clear: 

Table 11. — Offenses of personal violence: New York county and supreme courts and 
Massachusetts penal institutions. 





New York. 


Rank. 


Massachusetts. 


Rank. 


Nationality. 


Per. 

centage. 


Nationality. 


Per- 
centage. 


1 


Italian 


39.3 
18.6 
J7.7 
16.5 

} 13.0 

12.9 
11.7 


1 
2 
3 

4 
5 
6 
7 

8 


ItaUan... 


24.0 


2 


Austro-Hungarian 


A ustro-nun^arian 


22. S 


3 


Polish 


Polish .... 


16.4 


4 


Irish 


Russian 


15.5 




TGerman 


(terraan 


7.7 


fi 


\Russian 


Finnish 


7.0 


6 


Canadian .... 


English 


6.3 


7 


.American (total) 


C'anadian 


5.0 






9 
10 


Swedish 


4.6 






4.S 









Of the seven immigrant groups having higher percentiiges than 
the native-born in the New York figures, six are found in the Massa- 
chusetts figures exceeding the native-bom in percentage. It is 
also striking that the data from both States should show the three 
groups of offenders having the highest three percentages to be the 
same — Italian, Austro-Hungarian, and Polish — and to have the same 
rank. 

4. Aliens, or Unnaturalized Immigrants. 

When in 1904 the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization first 
enumerated the aliens detained in penal institutions throughout 
the United States, it was found that 1,213 such prisoners were in 
confinement for "murder" or "attempt to murder." As the total 
number of alien prisoners enumerated was 9,825, this group com- 
posed approximately one-eighth (12.3 per cent) of the entire body. 

The next enumeration was made in 1908. As tabulated by tfie 
Immigration Commission from the original schedules, the data then 
gathered show 1,588 alien prisoners under sentence for "homicide" 
or "attempted homicide" (presumably the same crimes as those 
designated in 1904 as "murder" and "attempt to murder"). Such 
persons comprised 12.4 per cent, or about one-eighth, of all alien 
prisoners guilty of violations of the law who were m confinement at 
the time of the enumeration. ** 

In Tables 12 and 13 is shown, by race, the number of aliens 
detained in penal institutions for these offenses in 1904 and 1908. 
The accompanying diagram illustrates the conditions in 1904. 

o In the tabulation of the 1908 data only those prieonerp were included who had 
been judged guilty of an offense. The 1904 figures probably include a number of 
prisoners who had not yet been tried, and thus the data for the two years are not 
wholly comparable. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



25 



Table 12. — Number of alieru detained in penal imtitutions for murder and attempt to 
mturder, United States, 1904, hy race. 

% 
[Compfled from Beport of CommissloneF^Qeiieral of Immigration for year ending June 30, 1904; p. 02.] 



Airican (black) 

Bohemian and Moravian 


... 13 
6 


Chinese 


61 


Croatian and Slovenian 


9 


Engl ish 


53 


Finnish 


22 


FVench •. .. 


39 


Oerman 


... 113 


Hebrew 


12 


Irish 


53 


Italian .•••••• .•••••...•« 


... 393 


Japanese 


31 



I^Hhuanian 


8 


Maervar 


29 


rt^>< 

Mexican , 


177 


Poliflh 


68 


Russian 


21 


Scandinavian 

Scotch 


30 

7 


Slovak 


25 


Spanish 


7 


All other races 


36 







Total. 



1,213 

Table 13. — Number of alien prisoners under sentence for homicide and attempted homir 
cidcj United States^ 1908, by race, 

[Compiled from data of Borean of Immigration and Naturalization.] 



African 

Canadian, French. 
Canadian, Other. . . 

Chinese 

Croatian 

English 

Finnish , 

French 

German 

Greek 

Hebrew 

Irish 

Italian, North 



26 
18 
16 
40 
23 
59 
32 
11 
103 
17 
15 
28 
86 



Italian, South 684 

Lithuanian 19 

Magyar 60 

Mexican 215 



Polish. 

Russiap 

Scandinavian.. 

Scotch 

Slovak 

All other races. 



82 
13 
30 
11 
50 
99 



Total. 



1,588 



A more exact comparison of the several races can be made with 
iregard to the 1908 figures by computing the percentage which those 
prisoners mider sentence for homicide and attempted homicide form 
of the total number confined for known offenses. These percentages 
are shown in the following table. Marked differences here appear 
between various races. ^ Over one-third of all Chinese prisoners were 
in confinement for homicide or attempted homicide, more than one- 
fourth of the North ItaUans, over one-fifth of the South Italians, 
over one-sixth of the African, Magyar, and Finnish, and over one- 
tenth of the Croatian, Slovak, Lithuanian, and Greek, while of only 
half the races shown in the table was homicide or attempted homicide 
the crime of less than one in every ten alien prisoners. 



Table 14.—. 



Relative frequency of homicide and attempted homicide among alien prisoners, 
United States, 1908, by race, 

[Compiled from data of Borean of Immigration and Naturalization.] 



African 18.2 

Canadian, French 4. 3 

Canadian, Other 5.4 

Chinese 38.8 

Croatian 15.9 

English 7.2 

Finnish 17.3 

French 6.9 

German 8.9 

Greek 11.4 

Hebrew 2.2 

79340*— VOL 86—11 3 



Irish 2.2 

Italian, North 27.1 

Italian, South 23.1 

Lithuanian 12. 3 

Magyar 17.5 

Mexican 27.8 

Polish 6.9 

Russian 8.3 

Scandinavian 6.0 

Scotch 3.9 

Slovak 12.9 



Digitized by 



Google 



26 



The Immigration Commission. 



Nwnber of aliens detained in penal ijigtiitUions for murder and attempt to murder, 1904. 
[Conipiled ixom annual report United Btatee CommJteioner<3eneraI of Immigiatioii, 1904.] 



O 



o 

o 

CM 



8 








^ M i i i I 



Ha 



f 



z 

11 



o 

5 



t: i 






If ^11 ii ill 

CoB<zu3«>S^B< 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



27 



Of the 1,588 alien prisoners under sentence in 1908 for feomicide, 
and attempted homicide, the period of residence in the United States 

{)rior to commitment was learned with regard to 1^524. Nearly one-, 
ourth of this number, or 24 per cent, had been miprisoned for the 
crime within three years after their arrival in this country. Among 
6 races the proportion exceeds one-fourth of the number reporting, 
as is shown m tne following table: 

Table 15. — Per cent<^ of aliens in prison for homicide or attempted homicide who had 
been in the United States less than three years prior to eommitm^entf by race, 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalisation.] 



African 15.4 

Canadian, French 11.8 

Canadian, Other 20.0 

Chinese 2. 7 

Croatian 17.4 

English 12.7 

Finnish 18.8 

French 18.2' 

German 17.5 

Greek 26.7 

Hebrew 7.7 



Irish 12.0 

Italian, North 21.7 

Italian, South 30.0 

Lithuanian 26. 3 

Magyar 35.6 

Mexican 19.4 

Polish 32.6 

Russian 38. 5 

Scandinavian 11. 1 

Scotch 18.2 

Slovak 20.0 



From these figures it appears that over one-third of the Russian; 
and Magyar aliens in prison for homicide or attempted homicide were 
committed before they had been three years in the United States; the' 
same is true of over one-fourth of the Polish, South Italian, Greek, 
and Lithuanian; one-fifth or more of the North Italian, Canadian 
other than French, and Slovak- over one-sixth of the Mexican, Finnish, ■ 
French, Scotch, German, and Croatian; more than one-seventh 6f the 
African, more than one-eighth of the English, more than one-ninth of' 
the Irish and French Canadian, and more than one-tenth of the' 
Scandinavian. In the case of the Hebrew and Chinese races, those 
whose commitments occurred within three years after arrival in the 
United States numbered less than one in every ten of tJtie aUen pris- 
oners reporting length of residence. 

It is not possible from available data to make any valuable statis-^ 
tical comparison of immigrants and natives, nor even of aUen and ' 
natiiralized immigrants, with regard to homicide. But-such compari- 
son is unnecessary to bring out me f a^ct that alien homicides are found * 
in considerable number m our penal institutions and that a large 
proportion of these committed tne crime soon after their arrival m„ 
the United States. 

The striking facts brought out by these figures suggest the value 
of a fuller analysis of alien criminauty. The most complete data of 
this character which are accessible are those resulting from the enu- ' 
meration of alien prisoners in the United States made by the Bureau 
of Immigration and Naturalization in 1908. The original schedules 
of this enumeration were loaned to the commission and new tables 
have been compiled from them. 

At the time of this enumeration there were 12,853 alien prisoners 
in the United States under sentence for violations of the laws. Nearly 
one-half of these belonged to four races only. South Italian pris- 
oners numbered 2,336, or 18.2 per cent of the total number; Irish . 

a Based on number reporting years in the United States. 



Digitized by 



Google 



28 



The Immigration Commission. 



prisoners,' 1,312, or 10.2 per cent; Polish prisoners, 1,229, or 9.6 per 
cent; and German prisoners, 1,191, or 9.3 per cent; making a total 
of 6,068 prisoners belonging to these four races, or 47.2 per cent of all 
alien prisoners enumerated. In the following table is snown the fur- 
ther mstribution of alien prisoners according to race: 

Tablb IQ.— Number of alien prisoners in the United SiaUs, 1968, bff raei, 
{Compiled from d»U of Bureau of Immlgntion amd Naturalisation.] 



Italian, South 2,336 

Lithuanian , 158 

Magyar 356 

Mexican 794 

Polish 1,229 



Russian. 
Scandinavian.. 

Scotch 

Slovak 

All other races. 



156 
508 
286 
407 
655 



Total « 12, 853 



African^ 145 

Canadian, French 422 

Canadian, Other 297 

Chinese 104 

Croatian 147 

English 833 

Finnish 189 

French : 164 

Cterman 1,191 

Creek 149 

Hebrew 693 

Irish 1,312 

Italian, North 320 

In the case of 247 prisoners the crime was not stated with sufficient 
definiteness to make the determination of its character possible. 
These cases have therefore been disregarded in the analysis of the 
data by race and crime. The remaining 12,606 prisoners have been 
grouped according to the character of their onense. The largest 
number were under sentence for gainful offenses,. 4,648, or 3Q.9 per 
cent of the total number whose cnmes were clearly enough defined to 
permit of classification^ being convicted of such offenses. Next in 
numerical importance is the group of prisoners xmder sentence for 
offenses against public policy. This group consists of 3,783 prisoners, 
or 30 per cent of the total number classifiied. Offenses of personal 
violence caused the imprisonment of only a sUghtly smaller number, 
3,337 prisoners, or 26.5 per cent, being unaer sentence for such crimes. 
Offenses against chastity were the crimes for which only 442 pris- 
oners, or 3.5 per cent, were confined, while the remaining 396 pris- 
oners, constituting 3.1 per cent of the total number, were convicted 
of unclassified crimes. 

Table 17. — DistrHmtion of classes oferime among alien prisoners, United States, 1908. 
[Compiled Irom data of Bureau of Immigration and NaturallxatSon.] 



Oflenses. 



Number of 
prisoners. 



Per cent 
of total 
number. 



OainTul 

Afaimst public pollcf 
Of personal violence . . 

Against chastity 

Oaolassified 

Total 



4,648 

S,783 

8,337 

442 

396 



36.9 
30.0 
26.6 
3.5 
3.1 



12,606 



loao 



These relations of the several crime groups apply only to the 12,606 
alien prisoners considered in the aggregate. When the various races 
are regared as units a lack of uniformity is found to exist in the dis- 

« Includes 3 not reporting race. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



2d 



tiibution of the classes of crime. The gainful offenses were the 
crimes for which the lai^est proportion of the alien prisoners of 
1 1 races were confined, offenses of personal violence of 7 races, and 
offenses against public policy of 4 races, while offenses against 
chastitjr and unclassified crimes caused the commitment of smaUer 
proportions of the prisoners of every race than did any of the three 
other crime groups. 

Those races which had a larger proportion of ahen prisoners und» 
sentence for gainful offenses than for any other class of crime are aa 
follows, the percentage which such prisoners form of the total aUea 
prisoners of each race being likewise shown: 



African 40.6 

Croatian 40.0 

English 46.2 

French 54. 1 

German 46.8 

Greek 39.6 

Those races having a larger proportion of alien prisoners confined 
for offenses of personal violence than for any other class of crime are: 



Hebrew 35.7 

Polish 38.2 

Russian 41.0 

Scandinavian 47. 2 

Scotch 45.a 



Magyar 39.7 

Mexican 43. 2 

Slovak 31.2 



Chinese 59.2 

Finnish 41.1 

Italian, North 50.8 

Italian, South 46.5 

Offenses against pubhc policy caused the commitment of a larger 
proportion or the alien prisoners of the following races than did any 
other class of crime: 



Canadian, French 47.1 

Canadian, Other 44.6 



Irish 67.7 

Lithuanian 36. a 



The per cent distribution of the several classes of crime among th^ 
alien prisoners of the various races is shown in Table 18. 

Tablb 18. — Fer cent distribution of classes of crime arrumg alien prisoners. United Statet^ 

1908, by race of prisoner. 

[Compiled from data of Bmvau of ImmlgratlOD and Natoiallxatlon.] 



Race. 


Oalnftil 
offenses. 


Offenses 
of per- 
sonal 

violence. 


Offenses 
against 
pubUc 
poUcy. 


Offenses 
against 
chastity. 


Undas- 
slfled 
crimes. 


Totat 


African 


40.6 
31.9 
3&.5 
18.4 
40.0 
46.2 
22.7 
64.1 
46.8 
30.6 
65.7 
. 20.1 
30.6 
29.2 
34.2 
29.2 
42.3 
88.2 
41.0 
47.2 
46.2 
26.8 


36.0 
11.7 
11.1 
50.2 
33.1 
14.1 
41.1 
17.0 
17.7 
63.6 
6.5 
6.8 
60.8 
46.6 
25.8 
30.7 
43.2 
26.6 
26.0 
14.3 
10.6 
81.2 


18.2 
47.1 
44.6 
20.4 
22.8 
83.4 
20.2 
20.1 
27.0 
22.8 
28.4 
67.7 
14.5 
18.0 
36.8 
21.3 
11.5 
20.8 
25.6 
33.5 
30.2 
20.1 


4.9 
5.2 
5.1 
1.0 


1.4 
4.0 
3.7 


lOOiO 


Canadian French . 


100. 


CanadVm, Othvr , 


100. 


Chinese 


100. a 


CTMitian . . . • r 


4.1 
1.6 
3.2 
2.8 
3.4 
.6 
2.6 
2.6 
1.0 
2.4 
1.0 
6.8 
1.8 
4.2 
6.8 
2.8 
1.8 
10.8 


100. 


English 


4.7 
8.8 
6.3 
4.2 
3.4 
6.7 
2.6 
2.2 
3.8 
1.3 
4.1 
1.7 
2.4 
2.6 
2.2 
8.2 
8.1 


100. 
100.0 


Finnish 


French. .... 


100. 
100. 


Owman . x 


Qreek 


loao 

100 


Hebrew 


Irish 


100. 


Italian, North 


100. 


Ttf»Hftfi; flniith, 


100.0 


Lithuanian..., 


100. 


Mwmir, ,.. _... 


100 


MexV^n... 


loao 


PoHfii... 


100 


Rofisian ^ ... ^ a 


100. 


jt<<«#n')|nfi^1an 


100. 


Scotch 


100.0 


Slovak 


100 







Digitized by 



Google 



30 The Immigration Commission. 

Gainful offenses. — ^Two races stand out prominently "with respect 
to the gainful oflFenses. The largest proportion of commitments for 
these offenses is found among the Hebrews, 55.7 per cent of all the 
alien prisoners of this race having been imprisoned for such crimes. 
The French stand second in rank, 54.1 per cent of the French pris- 
oners being under sentence for hke offenses. 

Of the specific crimes classified as gainful, larceny and receiving 
stolen property were those for which 35.1 per cent of all Hebrew alien 
prisoners were confined; burglary, the crime for which 15.4 per cent 
were imprisoned, forgery ana fraud the offenses of 2.8 per cent, and 
robbery the offense of 2.5 per cent. Of the French alien prisoners, 
25.8 per cent were imder sentence for larceny and receiving stolen 
property, 17 per cent for burglary, 7.5 per cent for forgery and fraud, 
and 3.8 per cent for robbery. The Hebrews have a larger proportion 
of alien prisoners committed for larceny and receiving stolen property 
than any other race, and the French a large proportion committed 
for forgery and fraud. The relative frequency of burglarv among 
prisoners of these two races is also notable. The Mexicans alone have 
a larger proportion of alien prisoners under sentence for this crime 
than the French, while the Mexican, French, English, and German 
races are the only ones which exceed the Hebrew in proportion of 
such prisoners. The proportion of French prisoners confined for 
larcenv and receiving stolen property is also relatively large, being 
exceeded only by the proportions of the Hebrew, Croatian, Polish, 
and African races. • No alien prisoners of the Hebrew or French 
races, however, were under sentence for blackmail or extortion. 
These crimes were confined to four races, the North Italian, South 
Italian, Irish, and German, the proportions being in the order given ; 
the North and South Italian races greatly exceeding the Irish and 
German in relative frequency of these crimes. 

Offenses of personal violence, — Over 25 per cent of the alien prisoners 
belonging to 13 of the races, and over 10 per cent of the aUen prisoners 
of 20 of the races, were imder sentence for offenses of personal 
violence. 

The Chinese, North Itahan, South Italian, and Mexican races 
'figure most prominently in the commission of such crimes. Of the 
103 Chinese prisoners, 61, or 59.2 per cent were under sentence for 
offenses of personal violence, while 50.8 per cent of the North ItaUan, 
46.5 per cent of the South Itahan, and 43.2 per cent of the Mexican 
prisoners belong in the same category. 

The largest proportion of prisoners confined for violent assault is 
shared by the Chinese and Mexicans, 4.9 per cent of the alien pris- 
oners of each of these races having been committed for this offense. 
Of prisoners confined for homicide the Chinese have the largest pro- 
portion — 38.8 per cent. This race ranks second in proportion of pris- 
oners for the crime of rape, being exceeded only by tne Greek. No 
Chinese prisoners, however, were under sentence for abduction or 
kidnaping. 

These latter crimes are the ones for which 1.6 per c«it of the North 
Italian prisoners were incarcerated, or a considerably larger pro- 
portion than that of any other race. The North ItaUans have also a 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 31 

relatively large proportion of prisoners under sentence for homicide 
and rape, the Chinese and Mexican being the only races having 
larger proportions of the former crime and Uxe Greek and Chinese of 
the latter. 

Relatively large proportions of the South Italian prisoners were 
under sentence for the various offenses of personal violence, although 
the largest proportion of prisoners confined for none of these crimes 
belong to tnis race. It ranks second in abduction and kidnaping, 
third m simple assault, sixth in violent assault, fourth in homicide, 
and seventh in rape. 

In proportion of aUen prisoners under sentence for simple assault, 
the Mexicans rank only sixteenth, but of those confined for violent 
assault they with the Chinese raiik first, for homicide second, for rape 
fourth, and for abduction and kidnaping fourth. 

It is further notable that the Finnish race has the largest propor- 
tion of ahen prisoners confined for simple assault, and 3ie Grt-eek of 
those confined for rape. 

OffeThses against 'public policy. — ^More than two-thirds of all the 
alien prisoners of the Irish race were in confinement for offenses 
against pubUc poHcy. As less than half the alien prisoners of every 
other race belonged in this category, this makes the Irish stand 
out prominently. Intoxication and vagrancy and truancy are the 
offenses for wmch large numbers of the Irish prisoners were com- 
mitted. Intoxication caused the imprisonment of 36.7 per cent of 
all Irish alien prisoners, and vagrancy and truancy of 19.1 per cent, 
one-h€ilf of all the Irish prisoners thus being confined for these 
offenses alone. In comparison with the proportion of ahen prisoners 
of other races confined tor like offenses these percentages are large. 

Of prisoners committed for intoxication the proportion next in 
rank is that of the French Canadian, or 24.5 per cent, while of those 
confined for vagrancy and truancy the proportion ranking next to 
that of the Irish is 12.5 per cent, being that of the Germans. 

In addition to intoxication and vagrancy and truancy, incorrigi- 
bility is the only offense against public policy singled out for special 
analysis. The Irish, which exceed all other races in relative fre- 
cjuency of intoxication and vagrancy and truancy, ranks oiUy twelfth 
in proportion of alien prisoners confined for incorrigibility, but the 
French Canadian, whose proportion of prisoners under sentences for 
intoxication is exceeded only by that of the Irish, outranks all othe 
races. '® 

Offemes against cJuistity. — The largest proportion of alien prisonei^ 
under sentence for offenses against chastity is that of the Hebrevr'* 
being 6.7 per cent. More than one-third of the Hebrew prison/ ? 
conmied for such offenses were imprisoned for crimes of prostitut.'T^ 
These latter crimes were those for which 1.74 per cent of the t ^^ 
number of alien prisoners of the Hebrew race were under sen ten', 
a larger proportion than that of any other race. It is notable 
no prisoners of the Croatian race were under sentence for any of 
against chastity and no prisoners of the African, Chinese, I 
anian, Magyar, Polish, Russian, Scandinavian, or Scotch race/ 
any crime connected with prostitution. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



32 



The Immigmdon Commission. 



LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES PKIOR TO COMMITMENT. 

From data shovring the length of residence in the United States 
prior to commitment, it was Teamed that about one-fourth of the 
alien prisoners reporting such data had been in this country less than 
three years at the time they were committed to the penal institution 
in which they were found. Of the 12,853 alien prisoners enumerated, 
12,425 reported years in the United States; 2,986 of these, or 24 per 
cent, had been incarcerated within three years after tiheir arrival. 

Of those prisoners under sentence for gainful oflFenses who reported 

J ears in the United States, 25.7 per cent were committed before they 
ad resided three years in this country; of those under sentence for 
offenses of personal violence, 24.9 per cent; of those confined for 
offenses agamst pubUc poUcy, 20.5 per cent; and of those whose 
crimes consisted of offenses against chastity, 21.1 per cent. 

In the case of 11 races, over one-fourth of the ahen prisoners under 
sentence for gainful offenses who reported years in the United States 
had been here less than three years at the time of commitment. 
These races and their proportions of such prisoners are as follows: 

Croatian 51.8 

Russian 43.3 

Magyar 39.0 

Slovak 37.8 

Polish 36.4 

Greek 32.8 

In the case of the following 7 races over one-fourth per cent of those 
prisoners confined for offenses of personal violence who reported years 
m the United States were committed within three years after their 
arrival. 

Russian 43.6 

Magyar 37.3 

Greek 37.0 

Italian, South 30.4 

In the case of 10 races a like condition existed with regard to pris- 
oners guilty of offenses against pu)>Uc poUcy. These races are: 



Canadian , other than French ..... 32. 

French 31.0 

Italian, South 28.7 

Italian, North 27.4 

Mexican 26.5 



Canadian, other than French 28. 1 

Polish 27.6 

Slovak 26.4 



Greek 59.4 

Croatian 42.4 

Russian 38.9 

Magyar 37.5 

glovak 36.0 



Polish 35.2 

Lithuanian 31. 5 

Italian, South 29.9 

Scotch 26.9 

African 26.1 



p Of prisoners whose crimes consisted of offenses against chastity, the 
Proportion whose commitment occurred within three years after 
skrival in this country exceeds 25 per cent in the following 6 races: 



on^ian, North 71.4 

Of ssian 50.0 

40.0 



African 33 . 3 

Polish 30.8 

Finnish 28.6 



poi^ch. 

^^ is shown in the following table, which summarizes these facts, 

^Pj»e than one-fourth of the Russian and Polish prisoners under 

^^^nce for each of the four classes of crime had been in the United 

^ves less than three vears at the time of commitment. In addition 

Italij^ese two races, the Greek, South Italian, Magyar, and Slovak 

portLhad proportions exceeding 25 per cent in the groups of prisoners 

ned tor offenses of gain, or personal violence, and against public 

y. For five other races the proportion of prisoners committed 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



83 



witiiin three years after arriyal exceeds 25 per cent in two classes of 
crime. These races are the African, Canadian other than French, 
Croatian, French, and North Italian. For four other races — the 
Finnish, Lithuanian, Mexican, and Scotch — the proportion exceeds 
25 per cent for one class of crime. 



Table 19. — Ter eent<^ of prisoners under sentence for each class of crime wl 
oommiUed within three years after arrival in the United States, by raee, 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization.] 



W€r$ 



Race. 

\ 


Oainftil 
offenses. « 


Offenses of 
personal 
Yioknoe. 


Offenses 

against pub- 

ncp<rilcy. 


Offenses 
against 
chastity. 


Afrirv* . .. ...... 


14.3 
28.6 
83.0 


14.8 
14.9 
28.1 
&4 
90.8 

lai 

21; 1 
14.8 
19.2 
87.0 
20.0 

ia7 

21.7 
30.4 
20.0 
37.3 
2L4 
27.6 
48.6 
13.0 
16.7 
26.4 


26.1 

ia6 

18.6 
11.1 
42.4 
10.2 
16.4 
12.9 
18.9 
60.4 
19.6 
6.4 
24.4 
29.0 
31.6 
37.6 
2a6 
3&2 
3&9 
17.0 
26.0 
86.0 


33.3 




15.0 


OuiadiaD. Other .... .. .. 


23.1 


C^inP!<^.; , ,, 




0^>atlaD 


61.8 

ao.5 

22.0 
31.0 
18.6 
32.8 
22.6 
12.» 
27.4 
28.7 
21.6 
39.0 
26.6 
36.4 
43.3 
13.4 
16.8 
87.8 




English ,.. w .. 


10.6 


inTiTiiih ....... ^ 


28.6 


French... . 


40.0 


fkrmAi. . X . . . 


12.8 


Greek 


20.0 


Hebrew 


18.2 


Irish 


15.2 


Italian, North 


71.4 


Italian, South. 


24.1 


Lithuanian .... 




Macyar.... .., . . ... 


14.3 


Mexican 


23.1 


PoUsh 


30.8 


Russian 


60.0 


Scandinayian ...............^ 




Scotch 


22.2 


Slovak 


1&7 







• Based on number reporting years In United States. 

There are thus only 7 races of the 22 shown whose ahen prisoners 
committed for each class of crime within three years after arriral in 
the United States compose less than one-fourth of the total number 
committed for the same class of crime who reported years in this 
country. These 7 races are the French Canadian, Chinese, English, 
German, Hebrew, Irish, and Scandinavian. 

Selecting the crimes of abduction and kidnaping, violent assault, 
blackmail and extortion, burglary, homicide, robbery, and rape as 
probably the most serious offenses, it is founa that 3,769 of the alien 
prisoners who reported years in the United States were under sentence 
for these offenses. Of these 876, or 23.2 per cent, had been in the 
United States less than three years at the time of tneir commitment. 

In the table following is shown by race the percentage which the 
prisoners committed for such crimes within three years after arrival 
m the United States forms of the total number under sentence for 
like offenses who reported years. 



Digitized by 



Google 



34 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 20. — Per cent a of alien prisoners under sentence for ojfenses of special gravity ^ whose 
commitments occurred witmn three years after arrival in the United States, by race. 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immlgratloii and Naturalisation.] 



African 10.0 

Ganadiaa. French 18. 6 

Canadian, Other 25.0 

Chinese 3.3 

Croatian 36.6 

EngUsh 15.7 

Finnish 22.6 

French 25.0 

German 17. 2 

Greek » 27.7 

Hebrew 16.7 



Irish 9.6 

Italian, North 21.7 

Italian, South 29.0 

Lithuanian 17.6 

Magyar 34.6 

Mexican 22.6 

Polish 33.8 

Russian 38.1 

Scandinavian 9.0 

Scotch 9.2 

Slovak 24.7 



Of the offenses enumerated above, burglary, homicide, and robbery 
caused the greatest number of commitments. In the following table 
the number and percentage of prisoners whose commitments occurred 
within three years fdfter arrival is shown by race for each of these 
three crimes: 

Table 21. — Aliens in prison for burglary, homicide, and robbery who had been in the 
United States less than three years prior to commitm,entt by race, 

[Compiled from data of Bureao of Immigration and Naturalisation.] 



Race. 


Number reporting 
years hi the United 
States. 


Nimiber in United 
States less than 3 
years prior to com- 
mitment. 


Percemtage to 
States less 
years prior 
mitment. 


United 
than S 
to oom- 




Bur- 
glary. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rob- 
bery. 


Bur- 
glary. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rob- 
bery. 


Bur- 
glary. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rob- 
bery. 


African 



25 

9 

124 

11 

26 

180 

10 

103 

63 

18 

133 

11 

23 

131 

100 

19 

62 

35 

10 


2« 
17 
15 
37 
23 
55 
32 
U 
97 
15 
13 
25 
83 

517 
19 
59 

206 
80 
13 
27 
11 
50 


10 

36 

34 

6 

15 

23 

18 

153 

3 

10 

33 

19 

3 

18 

12 

12 


6* 

6 

6' 

25 
2 

10 

29 
4 

19 
5 
3 

35 
1 
7 

35 

33 
9 
5 
3 
2 


4 

2 

3 

1 

4 

7 

6 

2 

17 

4 

1 

3 

18 

155 

5 

21 

40 

26 

5 

3 

2 

10 


1 
1 
4 


"*24.'6' 
25.0 


15.4 
11.8 
20.0 

2.7 
17.4 
12.7 
18.8 
18.2 
17.5 
26.7 

7.7 
12.0 
21.7 
30.0 
26.3 
35.6 
19.4 
32.5 
38.5 
11.1 
18.2 
20.0 


ILl 


Canadian, French 


14.3 


CVnftd ian! Other .,.,.. 


40.0 


Chinese./. 




Croatian 


3 

4 
2 
1 
7 
1 
1 
8 
6 
45 

2 

10 
6 
1 
1 
1 
2 


66.7 
20.2 
18.2 
38.5 
16.1 
40.0 
18.4 

7.9 
16.7 
26.3 

9.1 
30.4 
26.7 
33.0 
47.4 

8.1 

8.6 
20.0 


75.0 


EnRlish 


ILl 


Finnish 


100. 


French 


16.7 


German 


20.6 


Greek 


16.7 


Hebrew 


6.7 


Irish 


13 


Italian, North 


33 3 


•Italian, South 


29.4 


Lithuanian 


Maeyar 


20 


Mexican 


30.3 


Polish 


81 6 


Russian 


33.3 
6.6 


Scandinavian 


Scotch 


&3 
16.7 


Slovak 




Total 


1,198 


1,524 


463 


267 


365 


107 


22.3 


24.0 


23.1 





o Based on number reporting years in United States. 

b Abduction and kidnaping, violent assault, blackmail and extortion, burglary, homicide, robbery, 
and rape. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Chapter IV. 
CHABACTEB OF IMMIOBAirT AHD OF NATIVE CRIMHTAUTT. 

Before taking up the analysis of crime in the various race and 
nationality groups appearing in the data collected, a survey of general 
nativity and parentage divisions will be of value. The present 
chapter deals with the immigrant and native groups considered with- 
out reference to parentage, race, or nationalitv. 

The statistics of alien prisoners secured by the Bureau of Immigra- 
tion and Naturalization can not be used in comparing immigrants 
and natives, as no persons of American birth appear in them. Nor 
have the data of the New York children's courts been made the basis 
of any sudi comparison. They concern a class of offenders so dif- 
ferent from that with which all other data deal that it has not been 
deemed advisable to attempt any analysis of them. 

The number of criminal cases upon which this comparison of the 
criminality of immigrants and natives is based, omitting tliose in 
which tiie fact of native or foreign birth was not reported, is shown 
below; 



Source of data. 



Offeoders. 



Native. Foreign. Total. 



Neiw York City magistrates' oourts 

New York court of general sessions 

Coan^ and supreme courts. New York State. 

Chicago police department 

Mastnchnsetts penal institutions 

Total , 



365,386 
1,326 
7,286 

195,934 
15,219 



402,772 

880 

3,879 

104.997 

13, 101 



768,168 
2,206 

11,165 
300.931 

28,320 



585,151 



525,629 



1,110,780 



These statistics may be made to show certain general differences 
in the criminality of immigrant and native offenders. They can not 
serve to throw into contrast the relative quantity of such criminaUty, 
because population figures are not available for the periods covered 
by Uiem. In the analysis of the figures the chief endeavor has been 
to contrast the character of immigrant criminaUty with that of native, 
or American, criminaUty. 

A basis for such comparison is obtained by ascertaining what per- 
centage of the total criminaUty of each group of offenders is formed 
by each class of crime and by certain selected offenses that are capable 
oi fairly clear definition. By then comparing the percentages of 
different classes of crime in the immigrant group with the corre- 
sponding percentages for the native, the likeness or unlikeness of the 
ciiminalactivity of these two groups becomes apparent. 

Because of the widely different sources from wnich these statistics 
of crime have been obtained, it is not possible to use the figures in 
combination. Each set of data must therefore be separately analyzed, 

35 



Digitized by 



Google 



36 



The Iinmigrati<Mi Commissicxi. 



and although comparisons may be made of the facts shown by the 
figures derived from the different sources, these figures can not be 
totalled to form the basis of a combined analysis. 

Keeping each set of data distinct, the first step in the analysis 
consists in classifying the various crimes found in each. All clearly 
defined offenses have been grouped in the five classes eniunerated in 
Chapter 11. Four of these are sufficiently well defined to make their 
special analysis valuable. The fifth is a heterogeneous group of 
offenses whose character makes it apparently impossible properly to 
include them in any category indicating the quality of the criminaUty 
which they represent. In the analysis, therefore, no attempt has been 
made to deal with this fifth gr6up of crimes, although it has been 
included in the totals upon whicn all percentages are based. The 
1,110,780 cases forming the basis of this'investigation of immigrant 
and native criminaUty, obtained from five distinct sources, have been 
classified according to the nature of the crimes and the nativity of 
the offenders as follows: 

Table 22.^D%stTibuti{m of crimes: New York (city and State), Chicago, and Massadtusetts. 



OfltDse. 


New York City 

magistrates' 

courts. 


New York 
court of 
general 
sessions. 


New York 

county and 

supreme 

courts. 


Chicago police 
department. 


Massadiusetts 
penal instito- 
^tions. 




Native. 


For- 
eign. 


Na- 

live. 


For- 
eign. 


Na- 
tive. 


For- 
eign. 


Native. 


For- 
eign. 


Native. 


Focw 
eign. 


Gainful ofTenaes 


36,764 


24,635 


1,043 


589 


5,666 


2,345 


29,074 


10,316 


2,361 


a, 119 






Blackmafl and extortion . 
Burglary 


102 

7,221 

413 

27,000 
2,019 


185 

4,180 

272 

18,795 
1,203 


2 

322 

46 

6S2 
21 


11 
146 
33 

388 
11 


16 

2,181 

221 

3,009 
238 


53 

718 
76 


26 

5' IS 
3,605 

16,278 
8,422 


15 
1,231 
1,319 

6,72a 
1,000 


1 

872 

69 

1,886 
83 


""*"i26 


Forgery'and fraud 

Larceny and receiving 

stolen property 

Robbery...^.. 


43 

915 

35 






Oilenaes of pergonal violence. . 


14,292 


17,141 


170 


183 


855 


873 


9,104 


7,720 


657 


783 


Abduction and kidnap- 
ing 


146 
8,864 
3,063 
1,738 

482 


248 
9,720 
4,806 
1,856 

511 


8 

} 137 

14 
11 


4 

139 

24 
16 


37 

631 

72 
115 


36 

664 

110 
63 


82 

\ 2,276 

1815 

600 


54 

8,817 

2,188 

1,293 

368 






Assault, simple .......... 


602 
29 
19 
7 


616 


Assault,' vio^t.. .•••.... 


125 




37 


Rape 


5 






Offenses against public policy. 


310,321 


355,905 


89 


82 


509 


485 


144,528 


81,636 


11,498 


10,607 




123,809 
123,680 


102,742 
110,097 










109,129 


62,433 


866 
508 


446 












•'"S 




34 


31 


127 


49 


13,831 
2,040 

12,000 
7,528 


4,167 
438 

10,725 
3,883 


Vagrancy. 


17,649 

23,976 
21,407 


16,680 

87,615 
39,771 


405 


Violation of city ordi- 












All other 


55 


51 


382 


436 


786 


631 






Offenses against chastity 


2,066 


2,980 


9 


6 


J35 


72 


10,012 


3,434 


406 


360 


Crimes of prostitution .... 


1,356 
710 


2,156 
824 










8,702 
1,810 


2,441 
993 


74 
881 


82 


Another 










278 














Unclassified offenses 


1,943 


2,111 


15 


21 


122 


104 


3,216 


1,891 


208 


242 






Total 


365,386 


402,772 


1,326 


880 


t;^^ 


3,879 


195,934 


104,997 


15,219 


13,101 







CLASSES OF CRIME. 



Taking first the general classes of crime, their relation to the total 
oflFenses of native and foreign offenders is shown in Table 23. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



87 



i 



1 



It 



6Q 






If 

ii 



I 



i 
a 



m 

A 



a^sss 



|2S§a 






rǤ5 



§ as 






SSSgg 



ggiSi 















?^i^i 




r«oo»eor« 















o> oo t<> <Dra 



^jggrfrf 



do6H^^ 



ooooo 

ssgss 



ooooo 

88888 



jWMJW 8 1 



Digitized by 



Google 



38 The Immigration Commission* 

The most striking mference to be drawn from this table is that 
although the various classes of crime form widely different propor- 
tions of the total criminality in the different sets of data, the com- 
parative relation of immigrant and native offenders to them follows 
a fairly constant law. 

Thus, although in the fi^es for the New York City magistrates' 
courts, the pohce arrests of Chicago, and the commitments to Massa- 
chusetts prisons, the gainful offenses fonn very much smaller pro- 
portions of the total crimes than in those of the New York court of 
general sessions and the coimty and supreme courts of New York 
State, in all five sets of data these offenses comprise a larger percent- 
age of the total crimes of native-bom offenders than of tne total 
crimes of foreign-born. In each instance the difference in the per- 
centages of the two groups of offenders is sufficiently marked to bring 
out very clearly the fact that the gainful offenses are much more 
common among the criminal acts of natives than they are among 
those of immigrants. 

In the figures of the New York City magistrates' courts these 
offenses form nearly one-tenth of all the crimes of native-bom 
offenders, while they compose but little more than one-sixteenth of 
the total offenses of the foreign-bom. Of convictions in the New 
York court of general sessions considerably more than three-fourths 
of those of native-born criminals are for the gainful offenses, while 
but little more than two-thirds of those of the foreign-bom are for the 
same crimes. In the records of the county and supreme courts of 
New York over three-fourths of the crimes of natives consist of 

Jainful offenses and only three-fifths of the crimes of immiOTants. 
11 the figures of arrests in Chicago and of the commitments to Massa- 
chusetts prisons the gainful offenses form almost one-seventh ef aU 
the crimes of native-bom offenders and considerably less than one- 
tenth of those of the foreign-bom. 

In each set of data the gainful offenses occupy a distinctly larger 
place in the criminality of natives than in that oi immigrants. 

Offenses of personal violence, on the other hand, form a larger 
proportion of the total crimes of immigrant offenders. In each of 
the five sets of data the percentage of the foreign-bom is in excess 
of that of the native-bom. In the figures of the New York City 
magistrates' courts, the Chicago pohce arrests, and the Massachusetts 
prisons this difference is not great. The figures from the other two 
sources of information, however, show considerable difference in the 
American and immigrant commission of offenses of personal violence. 
The greatest is that foimd in the records of the county and supreme 
courts of New York, in which these crimes form 22.5 per cent of all 
crimes of immigrants and 11.7 per cent of those of natives. Nearly 
as striking are the figures of the New York court of general sessions, 
which show 20.8 per cent of all crimes of foreign-bom offenders to 
have been offenses of personal violence, while only 12.8 per cent of 
those of native-bom offenders were of this nature. 

Offenses against pubUc poUcy, as well as those of personal vio- 
lence, are shown by this table to be more prevalent among the 
crimes of immigrants than among those of natives. These onenses 
occupy a much larger place in the statistics of the New York City 
magistrates' courts, the arrests of the Chicago police, and the commit- 
ments to Massachusetts prisons than in those of the New York court 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 39 

of general sessions and the county and supreme courts of New York 
State. Of the cases of foreign-bom offenders coming before the New 
York City magistrates' courts 88.4 per cent were for these crimes, while 
of the cases of native-bom offenders 84.9 per cent were of this nature. 
The statistics of arrests in Chicago show 77.8 per cent of the offenses 
of the foreign-bom and 73.8 per cent of those of the native-bom to 
have been against pubUc policy. Of all commitments of immigrants 
to Massachusetts prisons 80.9 per cent were for crimes of this sort, 
while 75.5 per cent of the commitments of natives were for like 
offenses. Less than 10 per cent of the convictions of natives and of 
immigrants in the New York court of general sessions were for 
offenses against public poUcy, 9.3 per cent of those of inmiigrants 
and 6.7 per cent of those of natives having been of such crimes. 
In the county and supreme courts of New York, although only 7 per 
cent of the convictions of native-bom persons were of offenses 
against pubUc policy, they were the offenses of which 12.5 per cent 
01 the inmugrant convictions were obtained. 

Each of me five sets of data thus shows that inunigrant crimi- 
nality is more largely composed of offenses against public policy 
than is native crinunality. 

The group of offenses against chastity does not occupy any such 
constant relation to the crimes of immigrants and natives as do 
the three preceding classes of crime. In two of the sets of data, 
those of convictions in the New York court of general sessions and 
of arrests by the Chicago poUce, offenses against chastitv form larger 
percentages of the total criminality of natives than of immigrants. 
Their percentage of native crimes in the court of general sessions was 
0.7 per cent; of the crimes of the foreign-bom it was 0.6 per cent. In 
Chicago 5.1 per cent of the crimes of nonimmigrant offenders and 3.3 
per cent of those of immigrant offenders were against chastity. 
The figures of the city magistrates' courts of New York show such 
crimes to have composed a larger proportion of the criminal acts of 
the foreign-born than of the native-bom, forming 0.7 per cent of all 
crimes of immigrant offenders and 0.6 per cent of those of native 
offenders. In the statistics of the county and supreme courts of 
New York and of the penal institutions of Massachusetts offenses 
against chastity f onn the same proportions of the total criminality of 
immigrants and natives, these proportions being in the former set 
of data 1.9 per cent and in the latter 2.7 per cent. 

GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

By carrying this method of analysis further and observing the 
relations whiiHi the si)ecific crimes composing each class of ofi^nses 
bear to the total criminahty of immigrants and natives, more exact 
comparisons may be made. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



40 



The Immigration Commission. 



The various gainful offenses are thus set forth in the following 
table: 

Tabls 24.— Gkm\/uZ offentn compared with oil ofenmt: New York (ei^ and 8taU)^ 

Chicago t and Masta 

NUMBER. 



Oalnftil ofltoseib 



AU 
offensM. 



Black- 
mail «nd 
extor- 
tion. 



Bor- 



Forgery 

and 

fraud. 



Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen 
property. 



Robbery. 



Tota^ 



New York City maglstrates'oourts: 

Natire 

Foreign 

New York court of general see- 
skuiB: 

Native 

Foretcn.. 

New York county and lupreme 
courts: 

Naave 

Foreign 

Chioajso poUoe department: 

Foreign. *... I 

liaasaohuaetts penal Institutions: 

Native 

Foreign 



402,772 



1,826 
880 



7,286 
8,87» 

105,034 
104,007 

15,210 
18,101 



102 
18i 



7,221 
4,180 



822 
146 



2,181 
718 

5»748 
1,231 

872 
126 



418 
272 



221 
76 

8,605 
1,810 

60 
43 



9r,O0B 
18»786 



886 



8,000 

1,414 

16,278 
6,751 

1,836 
015 



8,010 
1,201 



84 

8,422 
1,000 



86.TB4 
24,635 



1.043 
580 



6,660 
2,345 

20.074 
10.316 

2,381 
1,110 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSE& 



NewYoikaty maglstrates'oourts: 
Native... .TVr!7. 


loao 
loao 

loao 
loao 

loao 
loao 

loao 
loao 

loao 
loao 


ao3 

.06 

.15 
L3 

.22 
L4 

.013 
.014 

.01 
.00 


2.0 
LO 

24.8 
116 

20.0 
1&5 

2.0 
L2 

2.4 

LO 


an 

.07 

8.5 
8.8 

8.08 
LOO 

L8 
L8 

.45 
.83 


7.4 

4.7 

40.2 
441 

4L8 
815 

&8 

14 

12l1 
7.0 


16 
.8 

L6 
1.8 

.18 

2.2 

L7 
LO 

.5 
.8 


lai 


Foreign 


1.1 


New York court of fsneial sea- 
sions: 
Native 


78.7 


Foreign 


eo.0 


New York county and supreme 
courts: 
Kative 


77.8 


Foreign 


eai 


Otal(^opoUce department: 


14.8 


FoTBign 

Massachusetts penU institutions: 
Native 


0.8 
1&5 


Foreign ......r^..^...... 


&.5 







Although the gainful offenses as a group form a larger proportion 
of the crimes of natives than of immigrants in each set of data, the 
rule, as seen from the above table, does not universally hold good with 
re^rd to specific crimes belonmng to this group. 

Blackmail and extortion in the records of the New York City ma^s- 
trates' courts, the New York court of general sessions, the county 
and supreme courts of New York State, and tJie police arrests of 
Chicago, form larger proportions of immigrant criminality than they 
do of native. The difference is especially noticeable in the figures of 
the New York court of general sessions and of the county and supreme 
courts of New York State. In the former blackmail and extortion 
form 1.2 per cent of the crimes of foreign-bom and onlv 0.16 per cent 
of those of native-bom offenders^ while in the latter tnese crimes are 
1.4 per cent of the total criminahty of the foreign-bom and only 0.22 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



41 



per cent of that of the natiye-bom. The figures of the New York 
City maristrates' courts and of the Chicago police arrests show only 
slight differences in the relations of natives and immigrants to black- 
mail and extortion. 

Forgery and fraud, in the statistics of the New York court of general 
sessions, form a slightly lai^er percentage of the total crimes of 
immigrant than they do of the total crimes of native offenders, the 
former being 3.7 per cent and the latter 3.5 per cent. 

With these exceptions, the various gainful offenses are more com- 
mon amon^ the cnmes of natives than among those of immigrants. 
Burglary, larceny and receiving stolen property, and robbery form 
in each of the five sets of data larger percentages of the total crimi- 
nality of the native-bom than of the foreign-bom. Forgery and 
fraud, except in the records of the New York court of generafsessions, 
are relatively more frequent among the crimes of natives than amon^ 
those of immigrants. Blackmau and extortion alone belong pn- 
marily to immigrant criminality. 

OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

The crimes composing the group of offenses of personal violence, 
and the proportions which they bear to the total criminality oi 
immigrants and natives, are shown for each of the five sets of data 
in the following table: 

Ta^lb 25. — OffeMM of personal violence compared with all offenses: New York (eUy and 
Stale)t Chicago, and Massachusetts, 

NUMBER. 



«f 'w York Cit J magistrates' courts: 

Native 

Fortifli. *. 

New York ooort of general ses- 
sions: 

Native. 

Foreigii.. 

New York county and supreme 
courts: 

Native 

Foreign 

Chicago police d^artment: 

Native 

Foreign 

Hassadiusetti penal institutions: 

Native. 

Foreign 



Offenses of personal vtolenoe. 



AU 
offenses. 



365,386 
403,772 



880 



7,286 
3,879 

105,934 
104,997 

15,219 
13, 101 



Abduc- 
tion and 
kidni^ 
Ing. 



146 
248 



Simple 
assault. 



8,864 
9,720 



Violent 
assault 



3,063 
4,806 



137 
139 



631 
664 



4,831 
3,817 

602 
. 616 



2,276 
2,188 



125 



Homl- 
cide. 



1,738 
1,856 



72 
110 

1,816 
1,293 

19 
87 



Rape. 



482 
611 



116 

63 



600 



Total 



13 



866 

873 

9,104 
7,720 



79340*— VOL 86—11- 



Digitized by 



Google 



42 



Toe ImmigratioQ Cxwhwwmoju 



Tablb 2S.^0ff<nm» of penonaL vMtnie e omp a n d wUk aO, ogei^MtM: New T<wk(eUffamd 
StaU), Chicago, and Mai9aehu$ett9— Continued. 

PBB CENT OF ALL OFFENBSa 









Onammoipm 


tsoml 


rWaieB. 








AH 
oOenet. 


Abdoo- 

tkmaod 

kidnap- 

taC- 


atopte 


Vlokitt 
aoMolt. 


Hood, 
ekle. 


R^. 


Total. 


NcwTorkCttymacbtntai'coarts: 
Nsttre.. 


lOQLO 

i«to 

loao 
loao 

lOQLO 

loai 

loo.n 
loao 

loao 
loao 


ao4 

.06 

.0 
.6 

.s 

.9 

.04 
.05 

.00 
.00 


2.4 
2.4 




as 

L2 

1.2 
2.1 

.2 
1.0 


as 

.5 

LI 

2.7 

LO 
2.8 

.9 
L2 

.1 
.3 


ai3 

.13 

.S3 

LS2 

LfiS 
La2 

.31 

.u 

.05 
.04 


S.9 
4.3 


New Yodi court of geaenl so- 
tkMm 
NatiT*. 


1 

1 

LS.8 

a? 

17.1 

2.2 1 
3.0 

4.7 


12.8 


v<»fifff 


20l8 


Hew Yofi: eoimtj and npreme 
eourtK 
NadT*. 


1L7 


Fonlf" 


23.8 


NatiTC 


4.8 


V'^'Yff" 


7.4 


MMwafhiiwtta penaJ insdtutkxiS: 
Nadve. 


4.3 


I'orflcn ... 


ao 











The instances in which the relation of immigrant and native 
offenders to specific crimes differs from their relation to the group 
of offenses of personal violence are very few. In only two cases 
is the percentage of the foreign-bom less than that of the native- 
bom. Abduction and kidnaping form 0.6 per cent of the total crimes 
of native-bom offenders appearing in the records of the New York 
court of general sessions, wnile they compose only 0.5 per cent of tiie 
crimes of foreign-bom offenders. Rape is the crime for which 0.05 
per cent of the native-bom offenders were committed to Massachusetts 

{orisons, while only 0.04 per cent of the foreign-bom were committed 
or that offense. In addition to these two cases in which offenses of 
personal violence form larger percentages of the criminaUty of natives 
than of that of immi^ants, tnere are three others in which the per- 
centages of the two classes of offenders are the same. These three are 
all found in the statistics of the New York City magistrate' courts: — 
simple assault composes 2.4 per cent of all the crimes of inmiigrant 
offenders and the same percentage of all the crimes of native offend- 
ers; homicide forms 0.5 per cent of the total crime of each; and 
rape 0.13 per cent. 

The preceding table shows, however, that assault (both simple and 
violent) and homicide in no case form smaller percentages of immi- 
grant crime than of native, and that with the exception of simple 
assault and homicide in the New York City magistrates' courts they 
form larger proportions of immigrant than of native crime. Abduc- 
tion and kidnaping, except in the case of the New York court of 
general sessions, is relatively more frequent among the crimes of 
foreign-bom than of native-born offenders, while rape, with the 
exception of its slightly greater percentage of the crimes of natives 
in Massachusetts, and its equal percentage in the New York City 
magistrates' courts, occupies a more prominent place in the criminality 
of immigrants than in that of natives. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



43 



OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

Offences against public policy are so diverse in nature in various 
sections of tne country that this group of offenses is very dissimilar 
for the five sets of data. The crimes recorded in the records of the 
city magistrates' courts of New York and in the police records of 
Qiicago have a greater comparability than those found in any of 
the other sets of data. A few offenses, however, and these the 
most important of the group, can be contrasted in various of the 
different collections of cnminal statistics. The crimes lending them- 
selves to this comparison, and the proportions which they form of 
immigrant and nonimmigrant criminaUty are shown in Table 34. 

Tabus 26. — Offenses against public policy compared with all offenses: New York (city and 
State), Chicago t and Massachusetts. 

NUMBER. 



AU of- 
fenses. 



Oflenses against public policy. 



Disor- 
derly 
conduct 



Pronk- 



Gftm- 
Ing. 



Va. 
grancy. 



Violation 
of city or- 



All 
other. 



TotaL 



New York City magis- 
trates' courts: 

Native , 

Foreign 

New YorK court of general 
sessions: 

NaUve 

Foreign. 

New York county and su- 
preme courts: 

Native 

Foreign.. 

Chlca^ poUce department: 

Foreign 

Massachusetts penal insti- 
tutions: 

Native 

Foreign 



365,386 
402,772 



1,326 



7,286 
3,879 

195,934 
104,997 



15,219 
13,101 



123,809 
102,742 



123,680 
110,097 



17,549 
15,680 



23,976 
87,615 



109,129 
62,433 



366 
446 



9,698 
9,083 



127 
49 

13,831 
4,157 



2,040 
438 



405 



12,000 
10,725 



21,407 
39,771 



7,628 
3,883 



786 
681 



810,321 
355,905 



89 
82 



500 



144,828 

81,630 



11,493 
10,587 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES 



New York City magis- 
trates' courts: 
Native 


100.0 
100.0 

100.0 

loao 
loao 

100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 


33.9 
25.5 

.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 

55.7 
50.5 

2.4 
3.4 


33.8 
27.3 

.0 
.0 

. .0 
.0 

.0 
.0 

63.7 
69.3 


0.0 

.0 

2.6 
3.5 

1.7 
1.3 

7.1 
4.0 

.3 
.2 


4.8 
8.9 

.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 

1.0 
.4 

3.9 
3.1 


&6 

2L8 

.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 

6.1 
]a2 

.0 
.0 





84.0 


Foreign 


88.4 


New York court of general 
sessions: 
Native 


6w7 


FcHvign 


9 8 


New York county and su- 
preme courts: 
Native 


7.0 


Foreign 

Chicago police department: 


12.5 
73.8 


Foreign 

Massachusetts penal insti- 
tutions: 
Native 


77.8 
76.5 


Foreign 


80.9 







This table clearly brings out the fact that although the group of 
offenses against public policy forms in each of the five sets of data 
a larger part of the total criminality of immigrant than of native 



Digitized by 



Google 



44 The Immigration G>mmission. 

oflfenders, no such condition exists with regard to the various specific 
offenses forming the group. Figures regarding the five pnenses 
selected for analysis are not to Be had for eacn set of data, and 
an element of mcompleteness thus enters into the comparison. 
The ^eatest value of tJie figures is, perhaps, the comparison of 
the cities of New York and Chicago which they render possible. 

Disorderly conduct, which in New York composes 33.9 per cent 
of all the offenses of the native-bom and 25.5 per cent of the of- 
fenses of the foreign-bom, forms in Chicago 55.7 per cent of the 
nonimmigrant crimmality and 59.5 per cent of the inmiigrant. In 
Massachusetts this offense was the cause of 2.4 per ecnt of the com- 
mitments of the native-bom and 3.4 per cent of those of the foreign- 
bom. 

Dmnkenness is not found in the Chicago records, being probably 
included under disorderly conduct. No comparison can therefore he 
made with New York, where dmnkenness forms 33.8 per cent of the 
total offenses of the native-bom and only 27.3 per cent of those of 
the foreign-bom. In Massachusetts, however, drunkenness com- 
poses a larger proportion of the crimes of the iforeign-bom than of 
those of the native-bom, being 69.3 per cent of the former and 63.7 
per cent of the latter. 

Gaming, or gambling, appears as a distinct crime in the figures 
of the New York court of general sessions, the county and supreme 
courts of New York State, the police arrests of Chicago, and the 
commitments to Massachusetts prisons. In the latter mree sets of 
data the percentages of this crime are larger among the native-bom 
than among the foreign-bom. In the records of the New York court 
of general sessions alone gambling forms a smaller proportion of the 
total crimes of native-bom offenders. 

Vagrancy (with which tmancy and incorrigibiUty have been 
included) appears in the statistics of the New YorK City magis- 
trates' courts, the poUce arrests of Chicago, and the Massachusetts 
commitments to penal institutions. In each of these the percentage 
of vagrancy cases is greater among the native-bom than among me 
foreign-bom. 

The violation of city ordinances is found only in the figures of 
the New York City magistrates' courts and of the arrests of the Chicago 
police. In the former such violations form 6.6 per cent of the crimes 
of native-bom offenders and 21.8 per cent of those of foreign-bora 
offenders. In the latter they compose 6.1 per cent of the total 
offenses of the native-bom and 10.2 per cent of those of the foreim- 
bom. They thus form approximately the same proportion of 5ie 
total criminality of nonimmigrant offenders in the two cities, while 
tiiey comprise more than twice as large a proportion of the total 
criminality of the foreign-bom in New York as in Chicago. In 
both cities the above table shows them to be considerably more 
common among the offenses of immigrants than among those of 
natives. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



ImmigraticMi and Crime. 



45 



OFFENSES AGAINST CHASTITY. 

Of the various offenses against chastity, it is proposed to com- 

Eare immigrants and natives only with respect to those which have 
een designated "crimes of prostitution. These include all of- 
fenses connected in any way with prostitution, such as prostitutioa 
itself, the keeping of or residingin disorderly nouses, acting as pro- 
curer, solicitor, or pimp, etc. The part which such crimes play in 
the total criminaUty of immigrants and natives is shown in the 
following table: 

Table 27. — Offoinu against duutita^ compared with all offenses: New York (city and 
State)^ Chicago, and Massachtisetts. 

NUMBEB. 





AU 
offenses. 


Offenses against chastity. 




Crimes 
of prosti- 
tution 


Another. 


TotaL 


New York Qty magistntei' ooortK 

Native 


366,386 
402,772 

1,326 
880 

7,286 
3,879 

195,034 
104,907 

15,219 
13,101 


1,356 
2,156 


710 
824 

9 
6 

135 

72 

1,810 
993 

331 

278 


2,066 
2,980 

' 9 


Foreign 


New York court of general sessioiis: 

Native 


Foreign 




5 


New York oonnty and supreme courts: 

Native 




135 


Foreign 




72 


ChicB^ pbUce department: 


8,702 
2,441 

74 
82 


10 012 


Foreign 


8,434 
405 


Massachusetts poial Institutions: 

NaUve....n7r. 


Foreign .....x. 


360 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



New York City magistrates' courts: 

Native 


100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 


0.4 
.5 

.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 

4.4 

2.3 

.6 
.6 




0.6 


Foreign...... ^^ ^^ ^ x ^^.x . 




7 


New Yori court of general sessions: 

Native 




7 


Foreign 




.6 


New Yoik county and supreme courts: 

Native .V. 




1.9 


Foreign 




L9 


Chica^ police department: 




5.1 


Foreign , 




3 3 


ICassacbosetts penal institutions: ' 

Native 




2.7 


Foreign 




2.7 









Although offenses against chastity form a larger proportion of the 
total crimes of immigrants than of those of natives in the statistics of 
the New York City magistrates' courts alone, crimes of prostitution 
are more prevalent among the crimes of immigrants not only in these 
same statistics, but also in those of the commitments to Massachusetts 



Digitized by 



Google 



46 The Immigration Commission* 

penal institutions. In the New York figures the native percentage 
of crimes of prostitution is 0.4 per cent and the foreign is 0.6 per cent. 
In the Massachusetts figures the native percentage is 0.5 per cent and 
the foreign 0.6 per cent. The police arrests of Chicago, which show 
a larger proportion of oflFenses against chastity than any other set of 
data, also show a larger percentage of crimes of prostitution. These 
crimes in Chicago form 4.4 per cent of the total criminaUty of native- 
bom offenders and only 2.3 per cent of that of foreign-bom offenders. 
In the figures of the New York court of general sessions offenses 
against chastity are slightly more conmion among native than among 
immigrant crimes, and in the county and supreme courts of New 
York State the percentage of both classes of offenders is the same 
with regard to onenses against chastity. No separation of crimes of 
prostitution has been made in either of these two sets of data. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Chapteb v. 
THE GOLOB FACTOB HT THE HATIVE OBOXJP. 

In the foregoing analysis all American-born offenders have been 
grouped together in each of the sets of data and this total compared 
with the group of immigrant offenders as a whole. Such a grouping 
of the native-bom, however, is subject to the criticism that it does 
not produce a true comparative standard, in that whites and negroes 
are classed together. To separate the white from the ne^o m an 
analysis of this character produces a more accurate standard oy which 
to measure the character of immigrant criminaUty. For it is the 
white American criminal with whom the iipmigrant offender properly 
should be compared. 

Of the five sets of data upon which tUs analysis of immigrant and 
native criminality is based, out two admit of such separation of white 
and negro offenders of native birth: in the other three it is impossible 
to make anv color distinction. Tne two sets of data in which this 
division of the native-born can be made are those of convictions in the 
New York court of general sessions and of arrests by the Chicago 
police. Making such a division for these, the number of cases falling 
m each group is as follows: 

New York court of general sessioDB — Convictions: 
Native-bom — 

White 1,079 

Negro.. 218 

Incuan 1 

Race unknown 28 

Total. 1,326 

Foreign-bom '. 880 

Aggregate 2,206 

Ghica«;o police arrests: 
Native-bom — 

White 171,120 

Negro 24,814 

Total 195,934 

Foreign-bom 104,997 

Aggregate 300, 931 

It will be observed that in the statistics from the court of general 
sessions 1 Indian and 28 native-bom persons of unknown race appear. 
In distinguishing between white and negro offenders, these 29 cases 
must be omitted, although they are retained in the totak of the native- 
bom offenders employed in the preceding section. The result of this 
inclusion is that in the following tables the total native-bom group is 
greater in numbers than the native white group plus the native negro 
group. 

47 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



48 



The Immigration Commission. 



Employing tluQ classification of crimes used in the comparison of 
immigrant and native criminality already made, the 2,206 convictions 
of the New York court of general sessions and the 300,931 arrests of 
the Chicago police have been tabulated by crimes and divisions of 
general nativity and color, as follows: 

Table 28. — DutrUmtion of crimes of white and negro native-born: New York court of 
gtnind eesnone and Chicago police arreste. 





New York court of general sessions. 




Offense. 


Native. 


Foreign. 


Native. 


Foreign. 




White. 


Negro. 


Total 


White. 


Negro. 


TotaL 


ddn^i oflniaee 


868 


1S2 


1,048 


689 


25^244 


8,880 


29,074 


10^816 




BlaokmaU and extoraon 


1 

660 
16 

114 


""14 
3 

•0 
6 

63 


2 

813 

46 

662 
21 

170 


11 
146 
33 

388 

11 

183 










BurgJftry. . X . 


6^038 
3,399 

13,735 
3,047 

7,609 


705 
206 

2,643 
376 

1,696 


6»743 
3,606 

16,278 
3:422 

9,104 


1,231 

iIjio 

6,751 
1,000 


Forgiary'diid fraud 

Laroeny and reoeiving stolen 


bSSS^:;:::;:::;:::::::;: 


OflenaesofpenoaalTiolenoe 


7,720 


Abdootion and kidiiai>lng... . 
Assanlt, simple 


9 

76 


46 

6 

1 

12 


8 

137 

14 
11 

89 


4 

189 

24 
16 

82 


76 

/ 3,881 

\ 1,721 

1,316 

516 

127,313 


6 
460 
665 

17,216 


82 

4,331 

2,276 

1,816 

600 

144,628 


54 

3,817 


Assault violent 


2^188 


Homldde 


t2»3 


Rape 


868 




81,636 


Dlsorderiy conduct. 










96,614 

11,608 

1 867 

10,974 


1,TO6 


100,129 
13,831 
2,040 
12; 000 


62,433 


Oamtns. .' 


si 


3 


34 


31 


^157 


Vamuicy . 


438 


Violation of d^ or<iini^n(^^ 










10,726 


AUotlier .' 


44 

7 


9 
2 


66 

9 


61 
6 




Offenses nf^i^^t chastity 


8,134 


1,878 


10,012 


3,434 


" ^ •••... 














7,077 
1,067 


1,626 
263 


6,708 
3,216 


2,441 


Another 











993 


Undassiflfld offenses. . . . 


16 




16 


21 


1,801 










Total 


1,07» 


219 


1,326 


880 


171,120 


24,814 


196,934 


104,907 







Applying fo these figures the method of analysis followed in the 
preceding section, the difference between white and negro criminality 
may be shown. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigmtion and Crime. 



49 



OLASBES OF 0BIME8. 

The four classes of crime to which analysis is confined form the fol- 
lowing percentages of the total offenses of each nativi ty and color 
group of offenders: 

Tablb 29. — CUuies ofervmu ofwUU and negro nathe-hom: Niw York eawrt ofgeMnl 
tesnoru and Chicago police arreiU, 

NUHBEI^ 





Total. 


Oalnftil 
oflbnses. 


Offenses 

of 
personal 
violenee. 


Offleniss 
against 
pahUo 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
ohastlty. 


Unelasri- 

fled 
offenses. 


N«w York oourt of geoenl Mntoni: 
Native- 

White 


1,079 
210 


818 

162 


114 
53 


75 
12 


7 
2 


U 


Nflgro ».»-.». »T»rTT 








Total 

Foreign 


1,326 
880 


1,048 
580 


170 
183 


80 
82 



5 


15 
21 


Chioyop^ce amsts: 

White 


m,120 
24,814 


25,244 
3;830 


7,600 
1,505 


127,313 
17,215 


8,134 
i;878 


2,920 


}}£gro 








Total 


195,034 
104,007 


20,074 
10,316 


0,104 
7,720 


144,528 
81,636 


10,012 
8,434 


3,216 




1,891 






PER CEI 


^T OF T 


OTAL N 


CXMBBR. 






New York court of general sessions: 
NatiTfr- 

White 


100.0 
100.0 


80.4 
60.4 


ia5 

24.2 


6.0 
6.5 


0.6 
.0 




l^egio 








Total 


100.0 
100.0 


78.7 
66.0 


12.8 
20.8 


6.7 
0.3 


.7 
.6 












liaitlvS- 

White 


100.0 
160.0 


14.8 
15.4 


4.4 

6.4 


74.4 
60.4 


4.8 
7.6 




Negro 








Total 


100.0 

loao 


14.8 
0.8 


4.6 
7.4 


73.8 
77.8 


5.1 
8.8 




Foreira.. 









This table brings out some striking differences in the character of 
native white and negro criminality. In the figures for the court of 
general sessions the gainful offenses form a larger proportion of the 
total crimes of the native whites than of the total crimes of the 
native-bom negroes, their percentage of the former being 80.4 and of 
the latter only 69.4. As they constitute onlv 66.9 per cent of all 
offenses of the foreign-born and 78.7 per cent or those ot the combined 
native-bom group, the relative frequency of these crimes is less 
among fopwgn-born offenders than among the native-bom either con- 
siderM as a homogeneous group or separated into its white and negro 
elements. In the Chicago figures the native-white percentage of the 
gainful offenses is the same as that of the undivided native-born 
group, 14.8 per cent, although it is less than that of the native-born 
n^roes, 16.4 j>er cent. Here, as in the case of the data of the court 
of general sessions, the proportion of the gainful offenses of the total 
crimes of the foreign-bom, which is only 9.8 per cent, is less than 



Digitized by 



Google 



50 The Immigraticm Commission. 

that of either of the color divisions of the native-bom group, and 
consequently less than that of the combination of these two ^oups. 

Offenses of personal violence form, in the statistics fumishea by 
both of the sources here employed, smaller percentages of the crim- 
inality of the native whites than of that of the native-born negroes. 
In the cases recorded by the court of general sessions they constitute 
10.5 per cent of native white crimes and 24.2 per cent, or more than 
twice as large a proportion, of the crimes of American negroes, while 
of the arrests made by the Chicago police, 4.4 per cent of those of 
white Americans were for these crimes and 6.4 per cent of those of 
native-born negroes. Both the court of general sessions and the 
Chicago poUce figures show the percentage of the combined native- 
born group to be slightly larger than the native white percentage, 
although smaller than that of the native negroes. The data from the 
court of general sessions show a larger percentage of offenses of per- 
sonal violence among the crimes of the foreign-bom than among those 
of the native whites or of the native whites and negroes combined, but 
a smaller percentage than that of the native negroes considered sepa- 
rately. In the Chicago figures, however, the foreign-born percentage 
not only exceeds that of tne native whites and the combined native- 
born group but even that of the native negroes. 

The group of offenses against pubUc poUcy forms, in each of the 
sets of data under consideration, a larger proportion of the crimes of 
the white Americans than of those of the native whites and negroes 
combined or of the latter taken alone. This similarity in the figures 
from these two distinct sources is the more striking because of the 
wide difference in the part which such offenses play in their totals. 
Of the crimes of all native-born offenders appearmg in the records of 
the court of general sessions, 6.7 per cent are of this nature, while of 
the white division of the native-born they form 6.9 per cent and of the 
negro 5.5 per cent of all crimes. Of the arrests of all native-bom 
offenders in Chicago, 73.8 per cent were for offenses against public 
pohcy and of those of native whites 74.4 per cent, while but 69.4 per 
cent of the arrests of American negroes were made upon such charges. 
In both series of figures the percentage which these offenses form of 
the crimes of immigrant offenders exceeds that which they form of the 
crimes of the native-bom considered either without regard to color or 
computed for the distinct divisions of white and negro offenders. 

The percentage which offenses against chastity torm of the total 
crimes of native white offenders is less^ in each of the two sets of data, 
than that which they form of the cnmes of the total native group. 
The figures of convictions in the court of general sessions show that 
such offenses comprise 0.6 per cent of the crimes of the native whites 
as compared with 0.9 per cent of those of the native negroes and 0.7 
per cent of the total offenses of all native-bom offenders, while the 
figures of the Chicago arrests give the proportion which offenses 
against chastity form of the crimes of white Americans as 4.8 per 
cent, that which they form of the crimes of American negroes as 7.6 
per cent, and of the crimes of all native-bom offenders as 5.1 per 
cent. With regard to the Chicago figures, the percentage of the 
foreign-bom, 3.3 per cent, is not only less than that of the total 
natfve-born, which is 5.1 per cent, but even less than the percentages 
of the native white and negro groups considered separately, the ror- 
mer being 4.8 per cent and the latter 7.6 per cent. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



61 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

A brief survey of the relations of white and negro native-bom 
offenders to various specific crimes may also be made. Inasmuch as 
for puiposes of comparison of the imminant group with the native 
whitC; it will be sufficient to point out those instances in which the 
percentage of the latter differs markedly h'om that of the combined 
white and negro native group, which forms the basis of comparison 
in the precedmg section, no detailed exposition of the figures need be 
made. 

Tabls 30. — Gainful offenses compared with all offenses of white and negro nativ&'hom: 
New York covrt of general sessions and Chicago police arrests. 







NUMBER. 












An 

oilenses. 




OalnM offenses. 






BurglaBy. 


Extor- 
tion. 


Forgei-y 

and 

Iraud. 


Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen, 
property. 


Robbery. 


TotaL 


New York court of general ses- 
sions: 
Nativ*- 

Wblte 


1,079 
219 


259 
54 


1 
'"i 


42 
3 


5S0 

9a 


16 
5 


868 


Negro. ..••.••••••••...••. . 


152 






Total 


1,826 

sao 


822 
146 


2 
11 


46 
33 


652 
388 


21 
11 


1,043 
560 


Foreign. 






CtiSa^ police arrests: 

White 


171,120 
24,814 


5,038 
705 


25 
1 


3,399 
206 


13,735 
2,543 


8,047 
375 


25,244 
8,830 


Necro 




Total 


195,934 
104,997 


5,743 
1,231 


26 
15 


8,605 
1,319 


16,278 
6,751 


3,422 
1,000 


29,074 
10,316 


Fofeign. 





PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



New York ooort of general ses- 
sions: 
Native- 
White 


100.0 
100.0 


24.0 
24.7 


0.09 
.00 


8.8 
L4 


51.0 
41.1 


1.5 
2.3 


80.4 


Negro 


70.0 






Total 


100.0 
100.0 


24.3 
16.6 


.15 
1.3 


3.5 
3.8 


40.2 
44.1 


1.6 
L3 


78.7 


Foreien. 


66.9 






ChSoa^ police arrests: 

White 


100.0 
100.0 


2.9 
2.8 


.018 
.0004 


2.0 
.8 


8.0 
10.2 


L8 
L5 


14.8 


Negro 


15.4 






Total 


100.0 
100.0 


2.9 
L2 


.013 
.014 


1.8 
1.3 


8.3 
6.4 


L7 
1.0 


14.8 


Foreign. •.... 


9.8 







Of the offenses classified as gainful, shown in the above table, 
four comprise larger percentages of native white crimes than of the 
crimes or the total native-bom group. Two of these — ^f orrery and 
fraud, and larceny and receiving stolen property — are found in the 
court of general sessions data. The former compose 3.5 per cent 
of the crimes of native white and negro offenders combined and 3.8 
per cent of those of the-native whites alone. The latter form 49.2 
per cenj) of ihe crimes of the combined native-born group and 51 



Digitized by 



Google 



62 



The Immigration Commissioiu 



S3r cent of those of the native whites considered as a separate group, 
f the gainful offenses for which arrests were made in Chicago, forgery 
and fraud and robbery are the ones which occupy lai^r places in 
native white criminality than in the criminality of the totai native- 
born grouj). The combined white and negro percenta^ of foi^ry 
and fraud is 1.8 per cent and the native white alone is 2 i)er cent. 
Arrests for robbery form 1.7 per cent of the arrests of ail naUve-boni 
persons and 1.8 per cent of those of native-bom whites. 

OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

The distribution of the several offenses of personal violence is 
shown in the following table: 

Table 31. — OffeMes of personal violence comvared with all offenses of white and negro 
native-bom: New York cowrt ofgtneral sessions and Chicago police atreitt, 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Offenses of personal Tlolance. 




Abduc- 
tion and 
kidnap- 
ing 


Simple 
assault. 


violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


TotaL 


New York oourt of general ses- 
•ions: 
NaUve- 

White 


1,079 
219 


» 7 


t 


10 


8 
6 


9 

1 


114 


Negro... 


46 


53 








Total 


1,326 
880 


8 

4 


137 
139 


14 

24 


11 
16 


170 


Foreign 


183 






Cbica^ police arrests: 

White 


171,120 
24,814 


76 
6 


3,881 
480 


1,721 
556 


1,315 
500 


616 
84 


7,809 


Negro 


1,595 




Total 


195,934 
104,997 


82 
54 


4,331 
3,817 


2,276 
2,188 


1,815 
1,293 


600 
368 


9,104 
7,730 


Foreign. 





PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



New York oourt of general ses- 
sions: 
Native- 
White 


100.0 
100.0 


0.6 
.0 


( 


A 




0.7 
2.7 


0.8 
.5 


10.6 


Negro.... 


21.0 


24.2 






Total 


100.0 
100.0 


.6 
.5 


10.3 
15.8 


1.1 
2.7 


.8 
t.8 


12.8 


Foreign 


20.8 






Chicago police arrests: 
Native- 
White 


100.0 
100.0 


.04 
.02 


Z3 

L8 


1.0 
2.2 


.8 
2.0 


.80 
.34 


4.4 


Negro 


6 4 






Total 


100.0 
100.0 


.04 
.05 


2.2 
3.6 


1.2 
2.1 


.9 
L2 


.31 
.85 


4.6 


Foreign. 


7 4 







With regard to the various offenses of personal violence, it is 
notable that but one instance appears in which such an offense 
forms a larger proportion of the cruninahty of native white offenders 
than of that or the combined white and negro group of the native- 
bom. This is si^QQ^le assault in the figures showing arrests by the 
Chicago police. Tnis crime forms 2.2 per cent of all crimes of all 
native-born persons and 2.3 per cent or tiiose of the white persons 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



63 



of native birth. As 3.6 per cent of the arrests of foreign-bom per- 
sons were for simple assault, the native white percentage, as wefl as 
the percentage ox the total native group, is less than that of the 
immigrant ^up. 

In four mstances in which the inamigrant percentage exceeds 
that of the total native-bom group it is less than ihe native negro 
percentage considered alone. 

The court of general sessions figures show that the crime of assault 
constitutes 16.8 per cent of the total criminaUty of the foreign-bom 
and only 10.3 per cent of that of the aggregate native-bom. Of 
the crimes of the native-bom negroes however, it forms 21 per cent. 

Homicide in Uie Q^res from the same source caused 2.7 per cent 
of the convictions of inmiifflrant offenders and only 1.1 per cent of 
those of all native-bom offenders. Of the convictions of native- 
bom negroes 2.7 per cent were for this crime. 

Of the arrests of foreim-bom persons in Chicago 2.1 per cent 
were for violent assault, wnile only 1.2 per cent of those of all native- 
bom persons were for this crime. The percentage, however, of the 
native negro group exceeds that of the foreign-bom, being 2.2 per 
cent. 

Homicide is, in Chicago, a relatively less frecjuent cause of arrests 
of immigrants than of natives, as it is of convictions in the New York 
court of general sessions. It is the chai]ge upon which 1.2 per cent 
of all immigrant offenders were arrested in Chicago, and 0.9 per cent 
of all native-born offenders. Yet in the Chicago poUce records, as 
in those of the New York court of general sessions, the native negro 
percentage of homicide is greater than the foreign-bom, the Chicago 
figures showing it to be 2 per cent as compared with the immigrant 
percentage of 1.2. 

OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLIOT. 

Offenses against public policy are found in the groups of offenders 
considered in this cnapter as shown in the following table: 

Table 32. — Offenses against public policy compared with all offenses of white and negro 
naiiverhom: New York court of general sessions and Chicago police arrests. 





NUMBER. 












AU 
offenses. 


Offenses against pabUo policy. 




Disor- 
derly 
oondoct. 


Gaming. 


Vagran. 
oy. 


Viola- 
tion of 
cityordi- 
nanoes. 


Total. 


New Tork ooart of general sessfons: 
Natire- 

White 


1,079 
219 




31 
3 






75 


Negro 








12 












Total 


l,32fi 
880 




34 






89 


Foreign.... 








82 












GhtaMopoUoe afreets: 

* v5^ 


in, 120 
24.814 


96,«14 
12,€1A 


11,606 
2,283 


1,867 
188 


10,974 

ilooe 


127,318 


Hegro 


17,215 




Total 


196,934 
104,997 


109,129 
02,433 


13,831 
iW7 


2,040 
438 


12,000 
10,725 


144,538 
81,630 


romfam .,.„,.. 





Digitized by 



Google 



54 



The Inunigradon CoininissitMi. 





AU 
offenses. 


Offenses against pnbllo polky. 




Disor- 
conduct. 


Gaming. 


Vagran- 
cy. 


Viola- 
tion of 
oHy ordl- 
nanoes. 


TotaL 


N«w York oourt of general sessions: 
Native- 
White 


100.0 
100.0 




%9 

1.4 






&9 


Negro 








&5 












Total 


100.0 
100.0 




2.6 
3.5 






6.7 


Foreijni 









9.3 












Ghicw) polioe arrests: 

Whita. 


100.0 
100.0 


56.5 
50.4 


6.8 
9.0 


1.1 

.7 


0.4 

4.1 


74.4 


Negro 


69.4 






Total 


100.0 

loao 


55.7 
59.5 


7.1 
4.0 


1.0 
.4 


6.1 

ia2 


73.8 


Foreign 


77.8 







Tablb 32. — Offerues (wainst public policy compared with all offenses of wkUe and negrQ \ 
native-born: New York court of general sessions and Chicago police arrests-^Contd. 

PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



In four of the five series of figures here shown, the native white 
percentage is greater than the percentage of the combined group of 
white and negro native offenders. 

Gaming, the only offense appearing in the data from the New York 
court of general sessions, forms 2.6 per cent of the crimes of all native- 
born offenders and 2.9 pej cent of those of the white division of this 
group.. 

Disorderly conduct, vagrancy, and the violation of city ordinances 
are shown oy the Chicago figures to be relatively more frequent 
causes of arrest of native white persons than of native whites and 
negroes combined. 

Disorderly conduct was the charge upon which 55.7 per cent of 
the arrests of all native-bom persons were made and 56.5 per cent of 
those of native whites alone. 

Vagrancy caused 1 per cent of the arrests of all native-bom persons 
and 1.1 per cent of those of the white portion of that group or offen- 
ders. 

Violation of city ordinances furnished 6.1 per cent of all offenses 
of the ag^egate native group and 6.4 per cent of the crimes of the 
native wmtes considered as a distinct group. 

In none of these cases, however, is the native white percentage 
less than the immigrant where the total native percentage is greater 
than the latter, nor greater where the percentage of the aggregate 
native group is less. And in no case where the total native percent- 
age is less tnan the foreign does the native negro exceed the latter. 

OFFENSES AGAINST CHASTITY. 

The only crimes singled out of the group of offenses against chastity 
are those of prostitution. These appear in sufficient numbers for 
satisfactory analysis only in the data nrom the Chicago police depart- 
ment. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



55 



Tablb 33. — Offenses against duutUy compared with all offenses of uhite and negro 
native-bom: Chicago police arrests, 

NUMBER. 





AH 

offenses. 


Offenses against chastity. 




Crimes 
ofproe- 
Utation. 


AU 
other. 


TotaL 


ChSouSo police ftrresta: 

White 


171,120 
24,814 


7, on 

1,625 


1,057 
253 


8,184 


Negro 


tm 






Total 


195,934 
104,997 


8,702 
2,441 


1,310 
993 


10,012 


Foreien • 


8;434 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Qkicuo police arrests: 

White 


loao 
loao 


4.1 
6.5 




4.8 


Negro 




7.6 








Total 


100.0 
100.0 


4.4 
2.8 




5.1 


Foreign T^,,-.-r*»«. 




8.8 









This table shows that crimes of prostitution occur with slightly less 
relative frequency among the oflFenses of the native white than among 
those of the total group of the native-bom. They constitute 4.1 
per cent of the former and 4.4 per cent of the latter. Their percent- 
age of native negro crimes, 6.5, is considerably in excess of that of the 
combined white and negro group. As the immigrant percentage is 
2.3, it is 'exceeded not only by that of the aggregate native group, 
but also by the percentages of the separate native white and negro 
groups. 

This analysis shows that while the elimination of the negro from the 
native group affects slightly some features of the criminality of the 
American-bom, it does not materially change the relations of the 
aggregate native and immigrant groups. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Chapter VI. 



THE PAREITTAOE FAGTOB IS THE HATIVE OBOXJP. 

Int(j the group of native-born oflFenders there majr enter immigrant 
ethnic factors, modifying the character of its criminaHty. Man^ 
of the native-born are doubtless of foreign parentage, and the crimi- 
naUty of this group is thus affected by unmigration and falls some- 
what short of a true comparative standard by which to measure the 
nature of immigrant crime. If these American-bom persons of for- 
eign parentage can be separated from those of native parentage, 
comparison can be made of the criminality of immigrants, native- 
bom children of immigrants, and native-born persons of nonimmi- 
grant parentage. Of the 2,206 convictions recorded in the New York 
court of general sessions and the 28,320 commitments to Massachu- 
setts penal institutions such a separation is possible. 

In the following table the crimes of the nativity and parentage 
groups of offenders are shown, classified as in preceding sections of 
this report. 

Table 34. — DistribiUion of crimes y by nativity and parentaae of offender: New York 
court of general sessions and Massajchusetts penal institutions. 





New York court of general 
sessions. 


Massachusetts penal institutions. 


Offense. 


Native- 
bom of 
native 
father. 


Native- 
bom of 
foreign 
father. 


Total 
native- 
bora. 


Foreign- 
bora. 


Native- 
bora of 
native 
father. 


Native- 
born of 
foreign 
father. 


Total 
native- 
born.* 


Foreign- 
bom. 


Oalnfiil offen?wi ,... 


483 


560 


1,043 


589 


1,090 


1,216 


2,361 


1,119 






Blackmail and extortion 


1 
140 
25 

302 
15 

02 


1 
182 
21 

350 
6 

78 


2 
322 
46 

652 
21 

170 


11 
146 
33 

888 
11 

183 


1 
171 
43 

839 
36 

278 


25 

959 
44 

378 


1 
872 
69 

1,836 
83 

667 




Burglary 


126 


Forgery and fraud 


43 


Larceny and receiving stolen 
property 


915 


Roboery 


35 


dfenses of personal violence 


783 


Abduction and kidnaping... 
Assault, simple 


3 

4 
48 


5 

60 

6 
7 

41 


8 

137 

14 
11 

89 


4 
139 
24 

82 










; 249 

^ If 

6 
3,596 


352 
17 
8 

1 

7,835 


602 
29 
19 

7 

11,493 


616 


Assauitl violent 


125 


Homicide 


37 


Rape 


5 


Offenses against public policy 


10,597 


Disorderly conduct 










131 
2,828 
23 
231 
385 

208 


232 
6,833 
23 
367 
390 

198 


366 

9,698 

46 

698 

785 

405 


446 


Drankenness ' 








9,083 


Gaming i 17 

Vagrancy ' 


17 


34 


31 


32 
405 


Allother i -- 








C3I 


OfPftnses against chastity 


5 


4 


9 


5 


360 






Crimes of prostitution 










41 
162 

119 


33 
165 

183 


74 
331 

303 


82 


Allother 










278 


Unclassified offenses. ............ 


4 


U 


15 


21 


242 






Total 


632 


694 


1,326 


880 


5,288 


9,810 


15,219 


13, 101 







a Includes 121 native-bora persons not reporting parentage. 
79340**— VOL 36—11 6 



67 



Digitized by 



Google 



58 



The Immigration G^mmission. 



By paralleling the comparison made of immigrant and native 
criminality in Chapter IV, the eflFect of the children of immigrants 
upon the native group may be determined for these two sets oi data. 

CLASSES OF CRIME. 

The four classes of crime employed in the analysis form the follow- 
ing proportions of the criminality of the native-bom of native father, 
the native-born of foreign father, the aggregate native-bom, and 
the foreign-born: 

Tablb 35. — Classes of crimes j hy nativity and parentage of offender: New York court of 
general sessions and Massachtisetts penal institutions. 

NUMBER. 





Total. 


Gainful 
offenses. 


Offenses 
of 

violence. 


Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
chasUty. 


Unclas- 
sified 
offenses. 


New York ooort of general sessions: 

Natlvo-boni of native father 


632 
604 


4S3 

560 


02 

78 


48 
41 


5 

4 


4 




11 






TotaJ nEtl TO-bom 


1,326 
880 


1.043 

589 


170 
183 


89 
82 


9 
5 


16 


Total foreiffn-bom 


21 






Mftssachuaetts penal institutions: 

NatiTe-boraofnati\*e father 


5.2S8 
9,810 


1,090 
1,216 


278 
378 


3,508 
7,835 


ao3 

198 


11» 


NatlTe-bom of foreign father 


183 






Total natiw^bom 


15,219 
13. 101 


2.361 
1,110 


657 
783 


11,403 
10,597 


405 
360 


303 


Total foreinh'bom. ................. 


242 






PER CENT OF TOTAL NUMBER. 


New York court of general sessions: 

Native-bom of native father 


100.0 
100.0 


76.4 
80.7 


14-6 
11.2 


7.6 
5.0 


as 

.6 




Natiye-bom of foreign father..., 








Total native-bom ... . » 


100. 
100.0 


78.7 
66.9 


12,8 
20.8 


6.7 
0.3 


.7 
.6 




Total forpign-bora 






* 


Massachosetts penal insUtutions: 

Native-bom of native father 


100.0 
100.0 


20.6 
12.4 


5.3 

3.9 


68.0 
79.9 


3.8 
2.0 




Nativie-born of foi\}ign father. 








Total nativ<f»-N>m 


100.0 
100.0 


15.5 
8.5 


4.3 
6.0 


75.5 

8ao 


2.7 
X7 




Total forpign-bom , 









Prom this table it is evident that the criminality of the American- 
bom children of immigrants is indeed different in character from that 
of the native-born of native father and from that of the foreign-bom. 
Yet this difference does not appear to follow a constant law in the 
two sets of data shown above. 

^ The gainful offenses are shown by the records of convictions in the 
New York court of general sessions to form a lai^er proportion of 
the crimes of the second generation than of those of the native-bom 
of native father, of the former comprisin£: S0.7 per cent and of the 
latter 76.4 per cent. The percentage of the latter group is therefore 
less than that of the combmed native group, which is 78.7. As the 
percentage of the foreign-bom is only 66.9, it is less than either that 
of the native-bom of native father or that of the native-bom of 
foreign father. ^ 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 59 

The records of the commitments to Massachusetts penal institu- 
tions show the gainful offenses to form a smaller percentage of the 
crim^ of the native-bom of foreign father than of those of the native- 
bom of native father. Of the fomier they comprise 12.4 per cent and 
of the latter 20.6 per cent. Their percentage of the latter is therefore 
larger than of the crimes of the aggregate native group, which is 15.5, 
while their percentage of the crimes of the native-oom of foreign 
father is smaller. Their percentage of the crimes of the foreign-born, 
however, being 8.5, is least of all. 

The offenses of personal violence form, in both sets of data pre- 
sented, a smaller proportion of the crimes of the American -born of 
foreign father than of those of any of the other groups. The data 
from the New York court of general sessions give the percentage 
relation between these offenses and the total crimes of the native- 
born of foreign father as 11 2, of those of the native-born of native 
father as 14.6; while the data from the penal institutions of Massa- 
chusetts rive their percentage of the former as 3.9 and of the latter 
as 5.3. The percentage of the aggregate native group is therefore 
in each case greater than that of the native-bom of foreign father and 
less than that of the native-born of native father, being in the court 
of general sessions data 12.8 and in the figures from the Massachu- 
setts penal institutions 4.3. As the percentage of the foreign-bom 
is in the court of general sessions figures 20.8 and in Massachusetts 
figures 6, it is in tne former case greater than that of the combined 
native-bom group and of each of the two parentage divisions thereof, 
while in the latter it is greater than the percentages of the acjgregate 
native-bom and of the native-bom of foreign father, but slightly less 
than the percentage of the native-born of native father. 

The percentage which offenses against public policy form of the 
crimes of the native group of foreign parentage is, in the figures from 
the court of general sessions less, being 5.9, than that which they form 
of the total onenses of the group of native-bom persons of native parent- 
age, which is 7.6. The Massachusetts figures, however, show a reversal 
in the relation of these two groups of offenders, the percentage of the 
native-bom of foreign father being 79.9, and of the native-bom of 
native father 68. Tnis makes the aggregate native percentage in the 
court of general sessions records, where it is 6.7, greater than that of 
the foreign-parentage division of the native group and less than that 
of the native-parentage division. 

In the Massachusetts figures the relation of the aggregate native 
group, whose percentage is 75.5, to its two component divisions is 
reversed. In each of these two sets of data the percentage of the 
foreign-bom is greater than that of the total native group and also 
greater than the percentage of each of the parentage divisions of the 
native group, being in the former case 9.3 and in the latter 80.9. 

Offenses against chastity are similarly related to the total crimi- 
nality of the native-born of native and foreign father in the two sets 
of data. The figures from the court of general sessions give the percent- 
age of the native-born of foreign father as 0.6, while that of the native- 
bom of native father is 0.8. The former percentage is thusless than that 
of the aggregate native group (which is 0.7) while the latter is greater. 
Of the crimes of the foreign-oorn, offenses against chastity form 0.6 
per cent, or the same percentage that they form of the crimes of the 
native-bom of foreign father. The percentage of the native-bom of 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



60 



The Immigration Commission. 



native father and the combined native group are both in excess of 
this. The records of the Massachusetts penal institutions also show 
offenses against chastity to occur with less relative frequency among 
the crimes of the native-bom of foreign father, of whicK they form 2 
per cent, than among those of either the native-born of native father, 
of which they form 3.8 per cent, or those of the combined group of 
native-bom, of which they compose 2.7 per cent. The foreign per- 
centage, 2.7, is the same as that of the total native-bom, greater ttian 
that of the native^-bom of foreign father, and less than that of the 
native-bom of native father. 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

Having considered the four principal crime groups, those specific 
offenses belonging to them which have been singled out for analysis 
in preceding chapters may now well be examined. 

All crimes composing the group of gainful offenses are shown in 
the following table: 

Table 36. — Gainful offenses compared nith all offenses y hy nativity and parentage of 
offender: New York court of general sessions ana Massachusetts penal institutions. 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Gainful offenses. 




Black- 
mail and 
extor- 
tion. 


Bui^ 
glary. 


Forgery 

and 

fraud. 


Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen 
property. 


Robbery. 


TotaL 


New York court of general ses- 
sions: 
Native-bom of native father. . 
Native-bom of foreign fatlier. . 


C32 
604 


1 

1 


140 
182 


25 
21 


302 
350 


15 
6 


483 
560 


Total native-bom 


1,326 
880 


2 
11 


322 1 46 
146 1 33 


3HS 


21 
11 


1.043 


Total foreign-bora 


580 








1 




Maasachusetto penal institutions: 
Nalive-bom of native father. . 
Native-bora of foreign father.. 


5,288 
9,810 


1 


171 

188 


43 

25 


839 
959 


36 
44 


1,090 
1,216 








Total native-bora 


15.219 
13, 101 


1 


372 
126 


69 
43 


1,834^. 
915 


83 
35 


2,361 


Total foreiim-bora 


1,119 









PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



New York court of general ses- 
sions: 
Native-bora of native father. . 
Native-bora of foreign father.. 


100.0 
100.0 


a2 
.1 


22.2 

26.2 


4.0 
3.0 


47.8 
50.4 


2.4 
.9 


76,4 
80.7 


Total nativ^bora 


100.0 
100.0 


.2 
1.3 


24.3 
16.6 


3.5 

3.8 


49.2 
44.1 


1.6 
1.3 


78.7 


Total foreign-bora 


66.9 






Massachusetts penal institutions: 
Native-bora of native father. . 
- Native-bora of foreign father. . 


100.0 
100.0 


<".o 


3.2 
L9 


.8 
.3 


15.9 
9.8 


.7 
.4 


20.6 
12.4 


Total native-bora 


100.0 
100.0 


<ro 


2.4 
LO 


.5 
.3 


12.1 
7.0 


.5 
.3 


15.5 


Total foreisn-bora 


8.5 







• Less thao 0.05 per cent. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime, 61 

Of these, blackmail and extortion do not occur among the offenses 
of the native-born persons of foreign parentage nor among those of 
foreign-bom persons appearing in the data of commitments to Mas- 
sachusetts prisons. Or convictions in the New York court of general 
sessions, 0.2 per cent of those of the native-bom of native father 
were for these crimes and onlv 0.1 per cent of those of the native- 
bora of foreign father. The foreign-bom have a larger percentage^ 
1.3, than either of these parentage groups of the native-born, and 
thus a larger percentage than the aggregate native group. 

Of the crimes of the native-bom or foreign father appearing in the 
records of the court of general sessions burglary forms 26.2 per cent, 
while of those of the native-born of native father it forms only 22.2 per 
cent, and of the total native group 24.3 per cent. All three of these 
percentages are larger than that of the foreign-born, which is only 
16.6. The records of commitments to Massachusetts penal institu- 
tions show burglary to form a lai^er part of the crimes of the native- 
bom of native father, 3.2 per cent, than of those of the native-bom 
of foreign father, 1.9 per cent. The aggregate native percentage, 
which is 2.4, is less than the former and greater than the latter^ 
while the percentage of the foreign-bom, 1, is least of all. 

Forgery and fraud belong, in both sets of data, rather to the 
crimes of the native-bom of native father than to those of any other 
group of offenders. The figures derived from the court of general 
sessions show that convictions for these offenses compose 4 per cent of 
the total convictions of this group, while they form out 3 per cent of 
those of the native-bom of foreign father and 3.5 per cent of those 
of the combined native group. They comprise a larger percentage 
of the total convictions of the foreign-bom, 3.8, than of those of 
either the combined native group or the native-bom of foreign father. 
This foreign percentage, however, is exceeded by that of the native- 
bom of native father. In the figures showing commitments to Massa- 
chusetts prisons 0.8 per cent of the total commitments of the native- 
born of native father were for forgery and fraud, while onlv 0.3 per 
cent of those of the native-born of foreign father were for these 
crimes, and 0.5 per cent of those of the aggregate native-bom. Such 
commitments form 0.3 per cent of the total number of those of 
foreign-bom persons, or a smaller percentage than they form of the 
total conamitments of the native-bom of native father or of the 
aggregate native-bom, although it is slightly larger than that which 
they form of the total commitments or the native-bom of foreign 
father. 

The effect of the foreign-parentage group upon the aggregate 
native percentage of larceny and receiving stolen property is to make 
it greater than that of the native-born of native father m the data from 
the court of general sessions and less in those from the Massachusetts 
prisons. The data from both sources show that larceny and the 
receiving of stolen propertv form a smaller proportion of the crimes 
of the foreign-bom than of those of the aggregate native group or of 
either of its parentage divisions. 

Robbery occurs with considerably greater relative frequency amon^ 
the crimes of the native-born of native father than among those oi 
the native-born of foreign father. In the figures showing convic- 
tions in the court of general sessions it forms 2.4 per cent of the 
former and only 0.9 per cent of the latter, while in the figures of 

t 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



62 



The Immigration G>mmission. 



commitments to Massachusetts prisons these percentages are, re- 
spectively, 0.7 and 0.4. In the case of the court of general sessions, 
robbery forms 1.3 per cent of the crimes of the foreign-bom, or a 
smaller percentage than of those of the aggregate native group or of 
the native parentage division of that group and a larger percentage 
than of the crimes of the native-born of foreign father. In the case 
of commitments to Massachusetts prisons the foreign percentage of 
robbery, which is only 0.3, is not only less than that of the aggregate 
native group, but less than the percentage of either of the parentage 
divisions of the native-bom. 

OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

All offenses designated as ''of personal violence'' are shown in the 
following table: 

Tablb 37. — OffeTises of personal violence compared with all offenses, by nativity and 
parentage of offender: New York court of general sessions and Massaehtisetts penal 
institutions. 

NUMBER. 





AU 
offenses. 


Offenses of personal violence. 




Abduc- 
tlon and 
kidnap- 
ing. 


Simple 
assault. 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


TotaL 


New York court of general sessions: 

Native-born of native father. . 

• NaUve-bom of foreign father. . 


632 
694 


3 
6 


77 
60 


8 
6 


4 
7 


02 

78 


Total native-born 


1,326 

880 


8 

4 


137 
139 


14 
24 


11 
1A 


170 


Total forelm-bom 


183 








Massachosetts penal Institutions: 
Native-bom of native father . . 


5,288 
9.810 




249 
352 


12 11 


6 

1 


278 


Native-born of foreign father.. 




17 


8 


378 








Total native-born 


]«,219 
13,101 




602 
616 


29 
125 


19 
37 


7 
5 


657 


Total Ibreign-bom 




783 









PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSEa 



New York court of general sessions: 
Native-born of native father.. . 
Native-born of foreign fiither. . 


100.0 
100.0 


0.6 
.7 


12.2 
8.6 


1.3 
.9 


0.6 
1.0 


14.6 
11.3 


Total native-bom 


100.0 
100.0 


.6 
.5 


10.3 
15.8 




1.1 
2.7 


.8 
1.8 


12.8 


Total fdreign-bom 


20.8 










Massachusetts penal institutions: 
Native-born of native father 
Native-bom of foreign father . . 


loao 
loao 


.0 
.0 


4.7 
3.6 


.23 
.17 


.21 
.08 


.11 
.01 


&3 
S.9 


Total natlve-bom 


100.0 

loao 


.0 
.0 


4.0 

4.7 


.19 
.95 


.1 
.3 


.05 
.04 


4.3 


Total foreign-bom 


&0 







This table shows abduction and kidnaping to be absent from the 
crimes of persons committed to Massachusetts prisons. Of the crimes 
of offenders convicted in the New York court of general sessions, 
abduction and kidnaping form a larger part, 0.7 per cent, of those of 
native-bom offenders of foreign father than of tnose of the native- 
bom of native father, 0.5 per cent. Their percentage of the crimes 
of the foreign-bom, 0.5, is tne same as that of the native-bom of native 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 63 

father, and is somewhat exceeded by the percentages of the native- 
bom of foreigp father and the ag^egate native group. 

No separation of assault into simple and violent assault is made in 
the figures shoTOng convictions in the court of general sessions. These 
show that assault plays a larger part in the cruninality of native-bom 
persons of native rather, of whose crimes it forms 12.2 per cent, than 
m that of native-bom persons of foreim father, only 8.6 per cent of 
whose convictions were of this crime. Of the total convictions of the 
foreign-bom 15.8 per cent were of assault, a larger percentage than that 
of the total native-bom group or than that of either of its parentage 
divisions. 

Simple and violent assault are separately shown in the figures of 
cormmtments to Massachusetts prisons. Each of these is less common 
among the crimes of the native-bom of foreign father than among 
those of the native-bom of native father. Simple assault forms 3.6 
per cent of the oflFenses of the former group of oflFenders and 4.7 per 
cent of those of the latter. The presence of persons of foreign 
parentage in that group renders the percentage wnich simple assault 
forms of the crimes of the total native group smaller than the per- 
centage which it forms of the offenses of the native group of native 
parentage, this latter being, as already stated, 4.7, "vmile that of the 
aggregate native group is 4. The percentage of the foreign-bom, 
although greater than that of the total native-born, is the same as that 
of the native-bom of native father considered as a separate group, 
namely, 4.7. 

Violent assault caused 0.17 per cent of the commitments of Ameri- 
can-bom persons of foreign parentage, and 0.23 per cent of those of 
American-bom persons of native parentage. Thus the former have 
the same effect upon the percentage of violent assault of the aggregate 
native group that they have with respect to the crime of simple 
assault. This percentage of violent assault is 0.19. Of the commit- 
ments of foreign-bom offenders those for violent assault form 0.95 per 
cent, a much greater percentage than that of the native-bom of 
native father, tne aggregate native group, or the native-bom of for- 
eim father. 

The various nativity and parentage groups bear similar relations to 
the crime of homicide iH both sets of data under consideration. The 
percentage of the native-bom of foreign father is less than that of the 
native-bom of native father, while that of the foreign-bom is greater 
than either of these and consequently greater than the percentage of 
the aggregate native group. The foUowing rearrangement in this 
order of the percentages shown in the above table makes this clearer: 

Ifftssa- 

ohusetts. 




NattTe-born of foreign father 0.9 0.06 

Native-born of native lather 1.8 .21 

Foreign-bom.... 2.7 .3 

Total native-bom 1.1 .1 

Rape is shown by the records of convictions in the court of general 
sessions to form a larger percentage of the crimes of the native-Dom of 
foreign father, 1, than of those of the native-bom of native father, 0.6. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



64 



The Immigration Commission. 



Of the crimes of the foreim-bom, rape forms 1.8 per cent, or a larger 
percentage than that of either of the parentage divisions of the native- 
Dom, andtherefore than that of the total native group. The records of 
commitments to Massachusetts prisons show a di Terenk state of affairs. 
Only 0.01 per cent of the commitments of American-bom persons of for- 
eign parentage were for rape, while 0.1 1 per cent of those of American- 
bbm persons of native parentage were for this crime. Further- 
more, 0.04 per cent of the commitments of the foreign-bom were for 
rape, and 0.05 per cent of those of the total native group. The for- 
eign percentage while less than that of the native-bom of native 
father and that of the aggregate native-bom, is greater than the per- 
centage of the native-bom of foreign father. 

OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

. Inasmuch as onlv four of the offenses composing the group of 
offenses against public policy have been subjected to analysis in the 
preceding sections of this report, comparison of native-bom offenders 
of native and foreign parentage may properly be limited to the same 
offenses. These four offenses are shown in the following table: 

Table 38. — Offenses against public policy compared uith all offenses, by nativity and 
parentaqe of offender: New York court of general sessions and Massachusetts penal 
institutions: 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Offenses against public policy. 




Disorder- 
ly con- 
duct. 


1 1 
enness. ^*^»nR- cy. 


All 
other. 


TotaL 


New York court of general sessions: 
Native-born of native father. . 


632 
694. 






17 
17 




31 
24 


4S 


Nativ^boiu of foreign father. . 




.!!!!.*!.*.. 




4X 












Total native-born 


1,326 

880 






34 
31 




55 
51 


S9 


Total foreign-bom 









82 












ICa^achusetts penal Institutions: 
Native-bom of native father. . 
Native-bom of foreign father.. 


5.288 
9,810 


131 
232 


2,828 
6.833 


23 
23 


231 
357 


385 
390 


3.59» 
7,835 


Total native-bora 


15,219 
13,101 


366 f^>t 


46 
32 


598 
403 


785 ' 11 49S 


Total foreign-b<mi 


446 


9,083 


531 1 in iut7 






' 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



New York court of general sessions: 
Native-bora of native father. . 


100.0 
loao 






2.7 
2.4 






7 6 


Native-bora of foreign Dither.. 










5.9 














Total native-bora 


100.0 
100.0 






2.6 
3-5 






6.7 


Total foreign-bora 






*^ •• 




9 3 












Native-bora of native fiither. . 


100.0 
100.0 


2.5 
2.4 


53.5 
69.7 


.4 
.2 


4.4 

3.6 




68.0 


Native-bom of foreign father. . 




79.9 








Total native-born 


100.0 
100.0 


2.4 
3.4 


63.7 
69.3 


.3 
.2 


3.9 
3.1 




75.5 


Total foreign-bora 




B0.9 









Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 65 

Three of these crimes — disorderly conduct, drunkenness, and vag- 
rancy — appear only in the records of commitments to Massachusetts 
penal institutions. Gaming alone is found in both sets of data. 

Disorderly conduct is shown by the above table to form the same 
proportion of the total crimes of the aggregate native-bom and of the 
division thereof which is of foreign parentage. Of the whole number 
of commitments of each of these groups of offenders those for dis- 
orderly conduct compose 2.4 per cent. Of the total commitments of 
the native-born of native father they compose a slightly larger part, 
2.5 per cent. Both of these percentages are less than that of the 
foreign-bom, which is 3.4. 

Conmiitments to Massachusetts prisons for drunkenness form a 
larger part of the total commitments of the native-bom of foreign 
father, 69.7 per cent, than they do of those of the native-born of 
native father, 53.5 per cent. Their percentage of the commitments 
of these combined groups is greater than that of the group com- 
posed solely of persons of native parentage, being 63.7. Tne per- 
centage of the foreign-bom, which is 69.3, is greater than that of 
either of the two latter groups, but slightly less than that of the 
native-bom of foreign father. 

Gaming forms, in the records both of convictions in the New York 
court of general sessions and of commitments to Massachusetts pris- 
ons, a slightly smaller percentage of the crimes of native-bom offend- 
ers of foreign parentage than of those of native-bom offenders of native 
parentage. The figures from the court of general sessions give their 
percentage of the former as 2.4 and of the latter as 2.7, while the per- 
centage of these two groups shown by the Massachusetts prison 
records are respectively 0.2 and 0.4. In each set of data the aggregate 
native percentage is slightly greater than that of the division of foreign 
parentage and slightly less than that of the division of native parent- 
age, being in the court of general sessions figures 2.6 and in those from 
the Massachusetts prisons 0.3. In the former set of data the foreign- 
bom have a larger percentage than any of the combinations of the 
native-bom, convictions for gaming composing 3.5 per cent of the 
total convictions of foreign-bom offenders. Commitments to Massa- 
chusetts prisons for this crime form the same proportion of the total 
commitments of the foreign-born that they do of those of the native- 
bom of foreign father, 0.2 per cent. This is a smaller percentage than 
such commitments form of the total number of those of the native- 
bom of native father or of the aggregate native group. 

Vagrancy caused a smaller proportion of the commitments of 
native-bom persons of foreign parentage to Massachusetts prisons, 
being 3.6 per cent, than of those of native-bom persons or native 
parentage, the latter being 4.4 per cent. Of the commitments of 
persons ot foreign birth those for this offense form only 3.1 per cent. 
This is less than their percentage of the total comimtments of the 
aggregate native-bom, which is 3.9, or of either of the parentage 
divisions of the native group, whose percentages are given above. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



66 



The Immigration G>mmi88ion. 



OFFENSES AGAINST CHASTnT. 

Of the oflFenses against chastity, crimes of prostitution alone are 
segregated in the comparison of immigrant and native criminaUty. 
These crimes of prostitution are not found in the records of convic- 
tions in the New York court of general sessions. Of commitments 
to Massachusetts prisons, the few which were for such crimes are 
shown in the following table: 

Table 39. — Offenses against chastity compared with all offenses^ by ruUivity and 
parentage of offender: Massoxhusetts penal instilutions, 

NUMBER. 





AU 
offenses. 


Offenses acainst chastity. 




Crimes 
tatton. 


AU other. 


TotaL 


Massachusetts penal institutioiis: 

Native-born of native fother 


6,288 
9,810 


41 
33 


ia2 

166 


203 


Native-born of forelm Cather 


196 






Total native-born 


15,219 
13.101 


74 
82 


331 
278 


405 


Total foreign-bo m 


360 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Massachusetts penal insUtutions: 

Native-born of native fother 


100.0 
100.0 


0.8 
.3 




3.8 


Native-bom of foreign father 




2.0 








Total native-born 


100.0 
100.0 


.6 

.6 




2.7 


Total foreign-bom 




2.7 









Considerable difference in the relative amount of this sort of 
criminaUty appears among oflFenders of American birth of native and 
of foreign parentage. Of the crimes of the latter, those of prostitu- 
tion form only 0.3 per cent, while of the crimes of the native-bom 
of native father they form 0.8 per cent, or nearly three times as large a 
proportion. Because of this comparatively smaller percentage of the 
native-born of foreign father, the percentage of the combined native 
group is made less than that of the foreign-Dorn, although that of the 
native-bom of native parentage is greater. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Chapter VII. 

DIFFEBEKCES DT IKMIOSAirT AHD SECOITD OEITESATIOV 

CBIME. 

The presence of data showing the parentage of offenders of Ameri- 
can birth makes possible a comparison of the criminality of certain 
immigrant groups and of the American-bom children of the same 
races and nationalities with the criminality of the group native-bom 
of native father. 

Of the various immigrant races appearing in the records of the New 
York court of general sessions five nave been selected for such analy- 
sis, together with the five native groups of correg)onding immigrant 
parentage. From the statistics of conunitments to Massachusetts penal 
mstitutions five nationaUty groups of immigrants and the five corre- 
sponding groups of natives have oeen selected. The groups to which 
this analysis is limited have been determined by their numerical rep- 
resentation among total offenders. No other comparable immigrant 
and second generation groups have a sufficient number of cases to 
make their inclusion in this comparison feasible. 

The chief value of this comparison of immigrant races and nationali- 
ties with American-bom persons of corresponding foreign parentage — 
tlie *' second generation — lies in the fact that it shows whether the 
American-bom children of immigrants become more like the American- 
bom children of native parents in the character of their criminaUty. 

1. Convictions in New York Court of General Sessions. 

The five races of immigrants selected from the data of the New 
York court of general sessions, October 1, 1908, to June 30. 1909, are 
the English, German, Hebrew, Irish, and Italian. The nve native 
OTOups of foreign parentage are those composed of persons whose 
fathers were immigrants belonging to the English, German, Hebrew, 
Irish, and ItaUan races. With these is shown the native-white group 
of native parentage, which serves as a standard with which the immi- 
grant and second generation groups are compared. 

67 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



68 



The Immigration Commission. 



Amone; these 1 1 groups of offenders the various crimes are distrib- 
uted as follows: 



Table 40. — Distribution of crimes, first and second generations compared: Convictions in 
New York court of general sessiouSj October i, 1908, to June 30 ^ 1909, 





Native 
white 

of 
native 
father. 


English. 


German. 


Hebrew. 


Irish. 


Italian. 


Offense. 


Im- 
mi- 
grant. 


Sec- 
ond 
gener- 
ation. 


Im- 
mi- 
grant. 


Sec- 
ond 
gener- 
ation. 


Im- 
mi- 
grant. 


Sec- 
ond 
gener^ 
ation. 


Ira- 
mi- 
grant. 


Sec- 
ond 
gener- 
aUon. 


Im- 
mi- 
grant. 


See- 

ond 

gener- 

ation. 


Gainful offenses 


333 


33 


23 


94 


96 


210 


86 


52 


234 


103 


S» 






Burglary 


85 
1 
22 

215 
10 

41 


3 


6 


27 


27 


66 

1 
15 

126 
2 

21 


22 


8 


78 


28 
10 
4 

56 
5 

88 


32 


Extortion 




Forgery and fraud 


1 
29 


1 
16 


10 
67 


4 
65 


8 

55 

1 

5 


41 
3 

25 


4 

149 
3 

37 




Larceny and receiving stolen 
DroDerty 


26 


Robbery 


1 


Offenses of personal violence 


1 


4 


13 


10 


14 


Abduction 


3 
33 
2 
3 

37 








2 
6 

1 
1 

4 


1 
15 

1 
4 

12 


"4* 

...... 

4 


1 

22 
2 

3 


"'33' 
3 
1 

18 


1 
64 
11 
12 

40 


2 


Assault 


2 


1 
1 
2 

2 


10 
3 

12 


10 


Homicide 


1 


Rape 


1 


Offenses against public policy. . . 


8 


Gaming 


. 15 
22 

3 

4 


1 
1 

3 


*'*'2" 


9 
3 

1 

5 


2 
2 

2 


7 
6 

1 

3 


3 

1 

1 


1 
2 

6 


8 
10 

2 

9 


11 
29 

4 


3 


Another 


s 


Offenses against chastity 


I 


Unclassified offenses 












Total 


418 1 39 


29 


125 


112 


247 


96 


86 


300 


235 


82 











CLASSES OF CRIME. 

The following table shows the proportion which each class of crime 
forms of the total offenses of each rade and parentage group: 

Table 41. — Classes of crimes, first and second generations compared: New York court 0/ 
general sessions, October 1, 1908, to June SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 



Race and parentage. 



Total. 



Gainful 
offenses. 



Offenses 
of per- 
sonal 

violence. 



Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 



Offenses 
against 
clmility. 



Unclassi- 
fled 



Native white of native father. 
English: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

German: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Hebrew: 

Inmiigrant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Italian: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 



418 



29 



125 
112 



247 
96 



86 
300 



236 
82 



23 



210 



52 
284 



41 



14 



37 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



69 



Table 41. — Classes ofcrvmeSy first and second generations compared: New York comH of 
general sessions. October i, 1908^ to June SO, 1909 — Continued. 



PER CENT OF TOTAL NUMBER. 



Race and parentage. 



Total. 



Gainful 
offenses. 



O Senses 
of per- 
sonal 

violence. 



I 



Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 



Offenses < Unolassl- 
agalnst fled 
chastity, offenses. 



Native white pf native father. 
English: 

Immlnant 

Second generation 

Oerroan: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Hebrew: 

Immigrant i 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immigrant 

Secona generation. 

Italian: 

Immignmt 

Second generation 



100.0 



loao 

100.0 



100.0 

loao 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 

loao 



100.0 
100.0 



79.7 



84.6 
79.3 



76.2 
85.7 



85.0 



6a5 
78.0 



43.8 
72.0 



9.8 



2.6 
13.8 



10.4 
8.9 



&5 
5.2 



29.1 
12.3 



37.4 
17.1 



8.9 



5.1 
6.9 



9.6 
3.6 



4.9 
4.2 



3.5 

ao 



17.0 
9.8 



0.7 



7.7 
.0 



.4 

1.0 



.0 
1.2 



A comparison of these groups of offenders brings out the fact that 
in certain cases the character of the criminality of native-born chil- 
dren of immigrants tends to swing away from that of immigrants 
themselves toward that of the native-born whites of nonimmigrant 
parentage. 

Thus the above table shows that of the crimes of the English immi- 
grant group the ^gainful offenses form 84.6 per cent, while of the 
crimes of tne native-bom children of English immigrants they form 
79.3 per cent. As these offenses compose 79.7 per cent of the crimes 
of native white offenders of native father, the percentage of the 
American-bom children of English immigrants differs from that of 
the foreign-bom English in the direction of the percentage of the 
group native white of native parentage. 

In some cases, as that citea above, the percentages of the immi- 
grant and corresponding second generation groups stand on either 
side of the percentage of the native whites of native father, wliile in 
others both are on the same side of it. 

But the percentage of the second veneration, in differing from that 
of the first, differs in the direction of the white nonimmigrant stand- 
ard — the native white of native father. With the exception of the 
children of Hebrew immigrants, such is the case with each of the 
second generation groups shown above. 

The foreign-bom Hebrews, it will be observed, show gainful offenses 
amounting to 85 per cent of the total criminalitv of the group, wliile the 
percentage of the second generation is 89.6. These, compared with the 
percentage of the native whites of native father, which is 79.7, illus- 
trate this difference, for while both of the former are greater than 
the last, the percentage of the Hebrew second generation differs from 
that of the first generation away from the percentage of the native 
white of native father instead of toward it. The same is true with 
regard to offenses of personal violence, where the immigrant Hebrew 
percentage is 8.5 the second generation 5.2, and the native white of 
native father 9.8. Here both Hebrew percentages are less than the 
native white nonimmigrant standard, but the Hebrew second genera- 



Digitized by 



Google 



70 



The Immigration G>mmission. 



tion percentage, in being least of all three, indicates that the character 
of the criminality of this group, so far as offenses of personal violence 
are concerned, is not only unlike that of the first generation, but that 
the unlikencss is not in the direction of the native white of native 
father, but in the opposite direction. Offenses against public poUcy 
bear similar relations to the criminality of the first and second genera- 
tion Hebrew groups. Their percentage of the former is 4.9 and of the 
latter 4.2, wliile of the crimes of the native whites of native father 
this class of crime forms 8.9 per cent. 

In each of the three cases cited above, illustrating the relation of 
the criminality of immigrant Hebrews and native-bom children of 
immigrant Hebrews to that of the native whites of native father, it 
will be observed that the percentage of the first generation is in each 
case nearer that of the native white of native father than is the per- 
centage of the second generation. This, however, may be true without 
resulting in any deviation of the second-generation criminality away 
from that of the American-bom group of native parentage. The 
German inunigrant and second generation groups are evidences of this. 
This can perhaps be most clearly shown by arranging the percentages 
of the foreign-born Germans, the second-generation Germans, and 
the native-bom whites of native father in the following manner: 



Rft t^ or desoQDti 



Offenses. 



Oftinful. 



Of 
personal 
violeDoe. 



Against 
public 
policy. 



German, inunierant 

Native white oTnative father 
German, second generation . . 



75.2 
79.7 
86.7 



ia4 
9.8 
8.9 



0.6 
&9 
S.6 



In each of these three series of percentages, that of the native white 
of native father stands naturally between those of the inunigrant 
and second-generation Germans. It is evident from this that the 
second -generation percentage, even though in each case further 
removed from the native white of native father than that of the 
immigrant German group, diffejiip from the latter in the direction of 
the percentage of the group native white of native parentage, instead 
of away from it. 

Comparison of the groups of immigrant English, Irish, and Italians, 
and the EngUsh, Irish, and Italian second-generation groups shows 
that the percentages of the latter are, with regard to each of the three 
classes or crime, respectively nearer those of the native white of native 
father than are the percentages of the corresponding immigrant groups. 
The second-generation percentage in every case tends toward that of 
the group of native whites born of native father rather than toward the 
percentage of the immigrant group to which it is alUed. Striking 
illustration of this is afforded by the Itahan second-generation group, 
in which the relative frequency of the various classes of crime is quite 
unlike that of the Italian immigrant group. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



71 



The following arrangement of the percentages throws this fact into 
sharper definition: 





Offenses. 


Race or descent. 


Gainful. 


Of 
personal 
violence. 


Against 
public 
policy. 


Italian: 

Immigrant 


43.8 
72.0 
79.7 


87.4 
17.1 
9.8 


17.0 


SeoonH generation .......•• 


9 8 


Native white, native father 


8.9 







GAINFUL OFFENSES, 



Turning to the specific crimes composing the group of gainful 
offenses^ similar comparisons may be made. 

Table 42. — Oainful ofenses compared with all offenses, first and second generations comr 
pared: New York court of general sessions^ October 1, 1908 ^ to June 30, 1909, • 

NUMBER. 



AU 
offenses. 



Gainful offenses. 



Burglary. 



Extor- 
tion. 



Forgery 

and 

fraud. 



Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen 
property, 



Robbery. 



Total. 



Native white of native fMher. 
English: 

Immimnt 

Second generation 

German: 

Immirrant 

Second generation 

Hebrew: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Italian: 

ImmiCTant , 

Second generation 



418 



125 
112 



247 
96 



86 
300 



235 
82 



85 



22 



32 



22 



10 



216 



126 
56 



41 
149 



10 



23 



94 
96 



210 
86 



52 
234 



103 
69 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native white of native father 

Engiish: 

Immigrant 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 


20.3 

7.7 
20.7 

21.6 
24.1 

26.7 
22.9 

9.3 
26.0 

11.9 
89.0 


0.2 

.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 

.4 

.0 

.0 
.0 

4.3 
.0 


6.3 

2.6 
3.4 

8.0 
3.6 

6.1 
8.3 

.0 
1.3 

X.7 

.0 


6L4 

74.4 
55.2 

45.6 
58.0 

61.0 
67.3 

47.7 
49.7 

23.8 
8L7 


2.4 

.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 

.8 
LO 

8.5 
LO 

2.1 
U2 


79.7 
84 6 


Second generation 


79.3 


German: 

Immigrant. 


75 2 


Second generation 


85 7 


Hebrew: 

Imminant 


85.0 


Second generation 


89.6 


Irish: 

ImiTilgmnt , 


CO. 5 




78 


Italian: 

Immfmmt 


43.8 




72.0 







Digitized by 



Google 



n 



72 



The Immigration CommissicHi. 



I 



.^ 









I 



I 

o 

I 



•c 

I 



^ 



si 

1 



€ 

3 





o 


III 




o 

1 


III 


III 
10 

9 
HI 
1^ 

O 

J 

IL 

Z 

< 




M^ 




1 ^ 

St t 

S i 1 

< s p 

«6 o J5 
S ^ z 

1 1 ! 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 78 

When the method of comparison akeady emploj^ed is applied to 
these figures, new results are obtained. Of the pairs of immigrant 
and second-generation percentages shown in the preceding table, four 
are exceptions to the rule of second-generation deviation in me direction 
•of the native white group of native parentaj^e. These four exceptions, 
instead of belonging to the same pair of mrst and second-generation 
groups as do the exceptions found in Table 41 are distributed among 
three pairs. Thus, at some point the second-generation Germans, 
Hebrews, and Italians differ in relative frequency of crime from 
the inunigrant Germans, Hebrews, and ItaUans, moving in the opposite 
direction from that in which the native whites of native parentage 
differ from the three specified immigrant groups. 

The exception of the German second generation is found in the 
crime of burglary, which forms 21.6 per cent of the total crimes of 
German immigrants, 20.3 per cent of those of native whites of native 
father, and 24.1 per cent of those of second-generation Germans. 

The exception of the Hebrew second generation occurs with respect 
to forgery and fraud, which compose 6.1 per cent of the crimes of 
foreign-bom Hebrews, 5.3 per cent of those of native whites of native 
father, and 8.3 per cent or those of the American bom children of 
Hebrew immi^ants. 

Two exceptions are found in the ItaUan second-g:eneration group. 
One concerns the crimes of forgery and fraud, wmch form 1.7 per 
cent of the total criminaUtv of the Italian immigrant group, 5.3 per cent 
of that of the American-born whites of native father, and which are 
entirely absent from the criminaUty of the Italian second generation. 
The other occurs in the figures for robbery. Among the convictions 
of ItaUan immigrants, 2.1 per cent are for this crime, among those of 
the native whites of native father, 2.4 per cent, and among those of 
second-generation ItaUans, only 1.2 per cent. 

The English and Irish second generations differ from the first in 
their percentages of burglary, of forgery and fraud, of larceny and 
receivmg stolen property, and of robbery, tending toward those of 
the native whites bom of native father, no exceptions being found in 
these comparable groups. The same is true of the second-generation 
Germans with respect to forgery and fraud and larceny and receiving 
stolen property, wnile robbery, occurring among the crimes of neither 
the first nor second generations, affords no opportunity for com- 
parison. The Hebrew second generation Ukewise foUows the rule in 
convictions for burglary, larceny and receiving stolen property, and 
robbery. The American-bom children of ItaUan iminigrants show 
Uke deviation from the criminaUty of the immigrant generation in the 
•crimes of burglary and larceny and receiving stolen property. 

OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENOB. 

The offenses desi^ated as those of '' personal violence" afford other 
instances of exceptions to the mle of second-generation deviation in 
the direction of tne native white of native fatner. These exceptions 
•are four in number, as shown by the table on next page. 

78340*— VOL 36— U 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



74 



The Immigration G>mmis8ion. 



Table 43. — Offenses of personal violence compared with all offenses^ first and second 
generations comparea: Ifew York court of general sessions^ October J, 1908, to June 
30, 1909. 

NUMBER. 





All 
oflenses. 


Offenses of personal violence. 




Abduc- 
tion. 


Assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


TotaL 


Native white of native father 


418 

39 
29 

125 
112 

247 
96 

86 
300 

235 

82 


8 


83 


2 

1 
1 

8 

1 

1 


8 


41 


English: 

Immigrant 


1 


Second genenUion 




1 

10 
6 

15 

4 

22 
33 

64 
10 


2 


4 


Oerman: 

Immigrant 




13 


Second generation 


2 

1 


1 

4 
1 


10 


Hebrew: 


21 


Second generation 


5 


Irish: 

Immigrant 


1 


2 
8 

11 

1 


25 


Second generation 


1 

12 

1 


37 


ItaUan: 

Immigrant 


1 
2 


88 


Second generation 


14 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native white of native father. . 

English: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

German: 

Immigrant , 

Second generation 

Hebrew: 

Immigrant , 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immigrant , 

Second generation 

ItaUan: 

Immigrant , 

Second generation , 



100.0 


0.7 


7.9 


0.6 


0.7 


100.0 
100.0 


.0 

.0 


.0 
3.4 


2.6 
3.4 


.0 
6.9 


100.0 
100.0 


.0 
1.8 


8.0 
5.4 


2.4 
.9 


.0 
.9 


100.0 
100.0 


.4 
.0 


6.1 
4.2 


.4 
.0 


1.6 
LO 


100.0 
100.0 


1.2 

.0 


25.6 
11.0 


2.3 
1.0 


.0 
.3 


100.0 
100.0 


.4 
2.4 


27.2 
12.2 


4.7 
L2 


6.1 
1.2 



0.8 



3.6 
13.8 



10.4 
8.0 



8.5 
5.2 



29.1 
12.8 



37.4 
17.1 



One of these exceptions is of the second-generation English and 
three are of the second-generation Hebrews. 

The English second-generation exception occurs with respect to 
the crime of homicide. Convictions for this offense form 0.5 per cent 
of the total convictions of native whites of native father, 2.6 per cent 
of those of Endish immigrants, and 3.4 per cent of those or second 
generation English. 

One of the exceptions of the Hebrew second generation is found 
in the figures showing the percentage of convictions for abduction, 
one in those for assault, and the third in those for homicide. 

The Hebrew second generation has no convictions for abduction, 
while one conviction is found among those of immigrant Hebrews, 
forming 0.4 per cent of their total convictions. The native whites 
of native father have three such convictions, which form 0.7 per cent 
of their total number. This shows the alienee of abduction from 
the crimes of the second-generation Hebrews to be a difference from 
the criminality of the first generation in the opposite direction from 
that of the American-born whites of native fatner. 

Of assault the percentage of the native whites of native father is 
7.9, that of the immigrant Hebrews 6.1, and that of the Amorican- 
bom children of immigrant Hebrews 4.2. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



76 



Homicide composes 0.5 per cent of the crimes of the native whites 
of native father, 0.4 per cent of those of foreign-bom Hebrews, while 
no cases of homicide occur among the crimes of the Hebrew second 
generation. 

The German, Irish, and ItaUan second-generation groups furnish 
no exceptions to the rule stated at the beginning of this chapter. 
The relative frequency with which they committed the various crmies 
shown in the preceding table diflfers in every case from that of the cor- 
responding immigrant group, tending to approximate to that of the 
native whites bom of native father. Inmiigrant English offenders 
have no convictions for assault or for rape, but as the native whites 
bom of native father have convictions for these crimes the fact that 
the second-generation English also show convictions for them makes 
the second generation more, rather than less, Hke the native whites 
bom of native father. The same is true of the German first and sec- 
ond generation groups with regard to abduction and rape, and of the 
first and second generation Irish with regard to the latter crime. 
The second-generation Irish have no convictions for abduction; but 
as 1.2 per cent of the convictions of the immigrant Irish are for this 
crime, and only 0.7 per cent of those of the native whites bom of 
native father, the absence of abduction from the list of second-gen- 
eration Irish crimes shows that the criminality of this group varies 
from that of the first generation along the same lines as the group of 
American-bom persons of native parentage. 

OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

But one other specific offense found in the data of the court of 
general sessions has been subjected to analysis in the preceding 
chapters of this report. This is the crime of gaming, foimd in the 
group of ** offenses against public policy." 

Table 44. — Offenses against 'MJiblic policy compared with all offenses, first and second 
generations compared: New York court of general sessions, October i, 1908, to June 
SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 



AH 
offenses. 



Offenses against public policy. 



Qamlng. 



AU 
other. 



Total. 



Native white of native father. 
English: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

German: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Hebrew: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

ItaUan: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 



418 



126 
112 



247 
96 



88 

aoo 



82 



22 



2 
3 

12 

4 

12 
4 

3 
18 

40 
8 



Digitized by 



Google 



76 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 44. — Offenses aaainst public policy compared wiih all offenses, first and second 
generations compared: New York court of general sessions, October 1, 1908, to June 
SO, i909— Continued. 

PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



AU 
offenses. 



Offenses against public policy. 



Qamlng. 



AU 
other. 



TotaL 



Native white of native father. 
English: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

German: 

Immigrant 

Second generation. 

Hebrew: 

Immigrant 

Second generation. 

Irish: 

Immigrant 

Seoond generation 

Italian: 

Immigrant 

Second generation. 



100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



3.6 



2.6 

.0 



7.2 
1.8 



2.8 
3.1 



1.2 
2.7 



4.7 
3.7 



8.9 



6.1 
6.9 



9.6 
8.6 



4.9 
4.3 



S.5 
6.0 



17.0 
9.8 



This table shows that but one of the second-generation groups 
deviates from the corresponding first-generation group in a direction 
opposite to that in which the native white group of native parentage 
deviates. This is the English second generation, among wnose con- 
victions none for gaming appear, while of the convictions of immi- 
Sant English offenders, 1, or 2.6 per cent, is of this nature, and of 
ose of native whites of native father 15, or 3.6 per cent. 

The German, Hebrew, Irish, and Italian second-generation groups 
all differ in percentage of convictions for gaming from the corre- 
sponding first-generation groups in the direction of the American- 
bom white of nonimmigrant parentage. 

SUMMABT. 

While cases are numerous in which the criminality of the second 
generation differs from that of the first in the direction of the crim- 
mality of the native white of native father, only one of the second- 
generation groups employed in this comparison maintains throughout 
the entire series of ngures analyzed a constant difference of this 
character. Each of the other four second-generation groups proves 
at some point an exception to the rule. The group exhibiting this 
unchanging relation is the second-generation Irish. Its percentages 
of the vanous crimes and classes of crime, together with those of 
the immigrant Irish and the American-born whites of native father, 
are shown in the following tables for the purpose of bringing out 
this fact more clearly. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



77 



Table 45. — Deviation of the Irish second aeneration from the immigrant: New York 
court of general sessions, October /, 1908 , to June SO, 1909. 



CLASSES OF CRIME. 



Oainliil 
offenses. 



Offenses 

of 
personal 
violence. 



Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 



Offenses 
against 
chastity. 



Irish: 

Imminant 

SeconH generation 

KatlTe white of native toiher. 



6a5 
78.0 
79.7 



29.1 
12.3 
9.8 



3.5 
6.0 
&9 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 



Bui;Klary. 



Forgery 

and 

fraud. 



Larceny 

and 
receiving 

sto len 
property. 



Robbery: 



Irish: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Native white of native iiather 



9.3 
26.0 
20.3 



ao 

1.3 
6.3 



47.7 
49.7 
51.4 



3.6 
1.0 
2L4 



OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 



Abduc- 
tion. 



Assault 



Homi- 
cide. 



Rapa. 



Irish: 

Immigxant 

Second generation 

Native white of native father 



1.2 
.0 
.7 



25.6 
11.0 
7.9 



2.3 
1.0 
.5 



.S 

.7 





GAMINO. 






Qamlng. 


Irish: 

TmTnigrant .....,..., w.ax..»a..a 


l.J 


Second generation I. II"" 


2.7 


Native white of native fiather 


3.f 







2. Commitments to Massachusetts Penal Institutions. 

From the data of commitments to Massachusetts penal institu- 
tions," October 1 , 1908, to September 30, 1909, five immigrant and five 
second-generation groups have likewise been selected for comparison 
with persons native-bom of native father. No separation, however^ 
of the white and negro constituents of the latter group is possible* 
and it is therefore a less accurate standard of comparison than that 
afforded by the data of the New York court of general sessions. 
FurUiermore, the Massachusetts records do not contain any classi- 
fication of the foreign-bom by race, nor of the native-born by race of 
father. The classification is, in both cases, by coimtry of births 

a Excluding the State farm. 



Digitized by 



Google 



78 



The Immigration Commission. 



Thus, in the following discussion the term *' nationality'* is used to 
indicate the country of birth of the foreign-bom, and when reference 
is made to the *^ second generation" it should be interpreted as 
meaning the American-bom children of the designated *' nationality." 
For example, by first-generation Canadians are meant persons born 
in Canada, while by second-generation Canadians are meant persons 
bom in the United States whose fathers were bom in Canada. 

The five pairs of immi^ant and second-generation groups employed 
in the following analysis are the Canadian, English, German, Irish, 
and Scotch. 

Only oiie of the five second-generation groups shows, in the data 
of commitments to Massachusetts penal institutions, a persistent 
deviation in the character of its criminalitjr from the corresponding 
immigrant group in the direction of the native-born of native father. 
This group is the second-generation Irish. 

The percentages upon which tliis conclusion is based are shown, in 
an arrangement admitting of ready comparison, in the following 
tables: 

Table 46. — DiatrifrntUm ofcnrruSf ftrit and second generations compared: CommitmenU 
to Massachusetts penal institiUionSf October /, 1908 , to September SO, 1909. 





Native 
bom 

of 
native 
father. 


Canadian. 


English. 


Qerman. 


Irish. 


Scotch. 


Offense. 


Immi- 
grant. 


Spo- 
ond 
gener- 
ation. 


Im- 
mi- 
grant. 


Sec- 
ond 
gener- 
ation. 


Im- 

mi- 

grant. 


Sec- 
ond 
gener- 
ation. 


Immi- 
grant. 


Sec- 
ond 
gener- 
ation. 


Im- 
mi- 
grant. 


SCO- 
ond 
gener- 
ation. 


Oftinfiil offenses 


1,090 


306 


220 


78 


76 


30 


36 


282 


726 


37 


38 






Burglary 


171 

1 

43 

839 
36 

278 


35 


43 


8 


17 


3 


6 


26 


106 




5 


Extortion 




Forgery and fraud 

Larceny and receiving 
stolen property 


is 

253 
134 


1 

171 
5 

52 


2 

67 
1 

65 


1 

57 
1 

23 


2 

24 

1 

12 


1 

27 
2 

8 


8 

243 
5 

189 


14 

687 
19 

260 


1 

35 
1 

12 


2 

25 


Robbery 


5 


Offenses of personal violence . . 


4 


Assault, simple 


249 
12 
11 
6 

3,508 


121 
5 
7 
1 

2,038 


48 
3 
1 

831 


51 
3 


23 


11 


8 


142 
45 
2 


247 
8 
5 


11 

1 


3 


Assault', viofent 


1 


Homicide 




1 






Rape 


1 
848 








Offenses against public policy. 


400 


104 


138 


6,718 


6,074 


376 


212 


Disorderly conduct 

Drunkenness 


131 

2.828 

23 

231 

385 

203 


126 

1,723 

1 

77 

111 

134 


39 
655 

1 
49 
87 

43 


46 1 11 
714 1 320 


"■73' 
...... 

20 

6 


1 
102 

1 
20 
14 

5 


173 1 157 
5,234 .'i-472 


21 
326 


8 
179 


Gamini; 


"'45' 
43 

29 


3 
37 
29 

12 


3 
161 
147 

70 


16 
226 
203 

113 




Vagrancy 


16 
13 

8 


15 


All other 


10 


Offenses against chastity 


9 


Crimes of prosti tution 

Another 


41 
162 

119 


34 
100 

61 


7 
36 

30 


12 
17 

26 


3 


1ft 


...... 

4 


1 

4 

13 


8 
62 

92 


13 
100 

1(» 


1 

7 

6 


1 
g 


Unclassified offenses 


g 










Total 


5,:^ 


2,676 


1,176 


1,036 


529 


156 


200 


6,351 7 !?7« 


439 


271 






' 





Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



79 



Table 47. — Deviation of the Irish second generation from the immigrant: Massachusetts 
penal institutions ^ October /, 1908, to September SO, 1909. 

CLA88E8 OF CRIME. 





Gainful 
offenses. 


Offenses 

of 
personal 
violence. 


Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 


Offenses, 
against 
chastity. 


Irish: 

ImTnigTATlt. .... .... . ...X..,»..,X... .X X .X. .XX X XX. 


4.4 

10.0 
20.6 


3.0 
3.6 
5.3 


90.0 
83.5 
66.0 


l.l 


SeconB generation 


1.6 


KatiTe-bom of native father 


3.8 







GAINFUL OFFENSES. 







Larceny 




Forgery 


and re- 


Burglary. 


and 


ceiving 




fraud. 


stolen 
property. 


0.4 


0.1 


3.8 


1.5 


.2 


8.1 


3.2 


.8 


15.9 



Robbery. 



Irish: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Native-bom of native father. 



ai 

.3 

.7 



OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 





Simple 
assault. 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


Irish: 

Immigrant 


2,2 
3.4 

4.7 


a 71 
.11 
.23 


ao3 

.07 
.21 


0.00 


Second generation 


.00 


Native-bom of native father 


.11 







OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 





Dis- 
orderly 
conduct. 


Drunk- 
enness. 


Gaming. 


Va- 
grancy. 


Irish: 

Immigrant 


2.7 
2.2 
2.5 


82.4 
75.2 
53.5 


0.06 
.22 
.4 


2.5 


Second generation 


3.1 


Natl ve-hora of natl«'e father. .................. x . x x . x x .. . . x . . . x 


4.4 







CRIMES OF PROSTITUTION. 



Crimes 
of pros- 
titution. 



Irish: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Native-bora of native father, 



ai 

.2 
.8 



Digitized by 



Google 



80 



The Immigration Commission. 



CLASSES OF CBIME. 

The four general classes of crime occur among the eleven groups of 
offenders selected for analysis as follows: 

Table 48. — Classes of (rimes , fir U and second gener<Uions compared: MassadiusetU penal 
institutions, October /, 1908 y to September SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 



Total. 



Gainful 
offenses. 



Oflenaes 
of per- 
sonal 

violenoe. 



Offenses 
a^inst 
public 
policy. 



Offenses 
against 
diastity- 



Unda88l> 
fiedof- 
fei 



Natiye-bora of native father. 
Canadian: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

English: 

Immigrant. 

Second generation 

German: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Imminant 

Seorad generation 

Sootch: 

Immlfltmt 

Second generation 



5.288 

2,675 
1,176 

1,036 
529 

155 
200 

6.351 
7,278 

439 
271 



1,090 



220 



30 



282 
726 



278 



134 
52 



189 
260 



3,598 

2,038 
831 

848 
400 

104 
138 

5,718 
6,074 

376 
212 



203 



134 
43 



TO 
113 



Il» 



61 



IS 



4 
13 



02 

106 



PER CENT OF TOTAL NUMBER. 



Native-bom of native father 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 


20.6 

11.5 
18.7 

7.5 
14.4 

19.4 
18.0 

4.4 
10.0 

8.4 
14.0 


6.3 

5.0 
4.4 

5.3 
4.3 

7.7 
4.0 

3.0 
3.6 

2.7 
1.6 


68.0 

76.2 
70.7 

81.0 
76.6 

67.1 
69.0 

90.0 
83.5 

86.6 
78.2 


3.8 

5.0 
8.7 

2.8 
2.3 

3.2 
2.6 

1.1 
1.6 

L8 
3.3 




Canadian' 

Immigrant 




Second generation ,... 




English- 

Tmmigrant 




Second generation ....•• 




German: 

Immigrant. ,..,,-,....,. 








Irish: 

Immigrant X . . 




Second generation. 




Sootch: 

Irnrnigrant 













Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



81 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

The distribution of the crimes composing the group of gainful 
offenses is shown in Table 49. 

Table 49,— Gainful offenses compared with all offenses^ first and second generations com- 
pared: Massachusetts penal institutions^ October ly 1908, to September SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 



AU 
offenses. 



Gainful offenses. 



Burglary. 



Forgery 

and 

fraud. 



Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen 
property. 



Robbery. 



Total. 



Native-bom of native father. 
Canadian: 

Imminant. 

Second generation 

En^lsh: 

Immimnt. 

Second generation 

Qennan: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Inuntmnt 

Second generation 

Scotch: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 



5,288 

2,675 
1,176 

1,016 
529 

155 
200 

6,351 
7,278 

439 
271 



171 



43 



26 
106 



43 



253 

171 



243 

587 



36 



,090 



306 

220 



78 
76 



30 
36 



282 
726 



37 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native-born of native father 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 


3.2 

L8 

3.7 

.8 
3.2 

1.9 
3.0 

.4 

1.6 

.0 
2.2 


0.8 

.5 
.1 

.2 
.2 

L8 
.5 

.1 
.3 

.3 
.8 


15.0 

9.5 
14.5 

6.5 
10.8 

15.5 
13.5 

3.8 
8.1 

8.0 
9.2 


0.7 

.8 
.4 

.1 
.2 

.6 
LO 

.1 
.8 

.2 
L8 


20. ft 


Canadian: 

Lmmigrant 


11.5 


Second generation 


18.7 


English: 

Immlgr*nt ,..^,-.»,t.».^ 


7.5 




14.4 


German: 

Immigrant 


19.4 


PeconB veneration 


18.0 


Irish: 

Immigrant.. , 


4.4 


Becond generation 


10.0 


Scotch: 

Immigrant 


8.4 




14.0 







Digitized by 



Google 



82 



The Immigiatioo CommiMoiu 



OFFENSES OP FBBSOHAL TIOLEXCE. 

The specific offenses of personal violence are shown below: 

Table 50. — OfenMaofwnonal vioUnee oompartd uith all offnmt.finX and tecond gen- 
erationt compared: MttS9aehu$eUs pemal irutitutions, Odobir 1, 190S, to SepUmber SO, 
1909. 

KUMBER. 





AH 
oflcnMt. 


Ofleosn of penooal Tioicnce. 




Simple 
assAoit. 


Violent ; eomi. ^ 
tstrtiili. ode. "-F^ 


ToUL 


NfttiTe-bom of nati re tether 


5,288 

2.«75 
1.176 

1,036 
529 

1S5 

2U0 

«.351 
7,278 

439 
271 


249 

121 
48 

51 
23 

11 

U2 
247 


12 
S 

3 


11 6 
l\ \ 


278 


CMn^Ayut' 


134 


^S^'^'rm4 fmmth^m . . 


S3 


En^isb: 

Tminirrefft. . , . ^,,, 


... • 1 


55 


ftfraniil fffuntion ^ 






21 


GtnDMo: 

Immifnuit , . , , 




1 


12 


Hfrmw) rmtntkm ..... x . 




8 


Irish: 


45 
8 

1 


2 


189 


fi'fvma sfnfrtition o.^^ 


5 


260 


ocotch: 


1 


12 


BfifotKl gmfratioo ..<.... X 


1 


4 









PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native-born of natire 
CMiadUm: 

Immigrant 

Second generation , 
English: 

Immigrant 

Second generation. 
German: 

Immifpmt 

8econa generation. 
Irish: 

Immifltoit 

Second generation. 
Scotch: 

Immigrant 

Second geocratlna. 



100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



4.7 



4.5 
4.1 



4.9 
4.3 



7.1 
4.0 



2.2 
3.4 



2.5 
1.1 



0.23 



.19 

.2b 



.00 

.00 



.n 
.11 



.23 
.37 



0.21 



.26 
.09 



.65 
.00 



.07 



.00 
.00 



0.11 



.1 
.00 



.00 
.00 



.00 
.00 



5.3 



5.0 
4.4 



5.3 
4.3 



7.7 
4.0 



3.0 
3.6 



2.7 
1.5 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



83 



OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

The offenses against public policy selected for analysis are exhibited 
in Table 51. 

Table 51. — Offenses aqainsi miblic policy compared loith all offenses y first and second gen- 
erations compared: MassaehitseUs penal instUtUions, October 1, 1908 ^ to September 30, 
1909, 

NUMBER. 





AU 
offenses. 


Offenses against public policy. 




Disor- 
derly 
conduct. 


Drunk- 
enness. 


Gaming. 


Vagran- 
cy. 


AU 
other. 


Total. 


Canadian: 


6,288 

2,676 
1,176 

1,030 
629 

156 
200 

6,361 
7,278 

439 
271 


131 

128 
39 

46 
11 


2,828 

1,723 
655 

714 
820 

73 
102 

6,234 
5,472 

826 
179 


23 

1 
1 


231 

77 
40 

45 
87 

11 
20 

161 
226 

16 
16 


385 

111 
87 

43 
20 

20 
14 

147 
203 

13 
10 


3,696 

2,038 
831 


Second generation.... 


En«iish: 

TmmljrrftDt. - . . . ..,x^. . ... . 


848 


SeconB generation.... 


3 


400 


Immigrant 


104 




1 

173 
157 

21 
8 


1 

3 
16 


138 


Irish: 

Immigrant 


6,718 


SeconB generation 


6,074 


Scotch- 

Immigrant ... . . 


376 


Second generation ............ 




212 









PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native-bom of native father. 
Canadian: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

English: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

German: 

Imminant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immiflant 

Second generation 

Scotch: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 



100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



100.0 
100.0 



2.6 



4.7 
3.3 



4.4 
2.1 



2.7 
2.2 



4.8 
2.9 



63.6 



64.4 
56.7 



68.9 
60.6 



47.1 
51.0 



82.4 
76.2 



74.3 
66.1 



0.4 



.00 
.60 



.06 
.22 



4.4 



2.9 
4.2 



4.3 
7.0 



7.1 
10.0 



2.6 
3.1 



3.6 
6.6 



68.0 



76.2 
70.7 



81.9 
75.6 



67.1 
09.0 



90.0 
83.6 



85.6 
78.2 



Digitized by 



Google 



84 



The ImmigFation CommiMoiu 



OFFENSES AGAINST CHASTITT. 

The proportion of offenses against chastity among alT offenses is 
presented in the table following: 

Table h2.^)ffen$ei against chastity compared with all offen^a, fnt and Meeond genera- 
lions compared: Massachusetts penal instittUions, October 1, 1908, to September SO, 
1909. 

NX7MBER. 



Kathre-bom of nattre tether. 



Imminaiit. 

Sccooa feDostlon. . 



InunloBiit. 

Seoood cenoatloiL . 
Ocmuo: 

TitimW rimt. 

Seoood ceDcntioD. . 
Iriih: 

ImminBDt. 

Seoood ceDcntkm.. 
Beotch: 

Ixnminaot 

Second geDcratkm.. 



AB 



2,«75 
1,176 



ISS 

aoo 

6,351 

7,278 

439 

271 



Oflenses against dwaUly. 



Crimes of 
proetitii- 



13 



AO 
oUier. 



162 



100 
36 



62 
100 



ToteL 



134 
43 



12 



70 
113 



PER CENT OP ALL OFFENSES. 



Natlvf-bflTn of natlye fathw 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 


as 

1.3 

1.1 

1.6 




3l8 


CanadJan: 

ImniiffTaat. . - 




&.0 


SeoonB ceneratlon. 




3.7 


English: 

Immirrant 




2lS 






2l3 


Oerman: 

ImniiffTaat ,- 




S.2 


SeoonB Eeneration. 




2.6 


Irish: 

ImmigrAnt, . - - 




1.1 


Second generation. 




1.6 


Scotch: 

ImTnlgrant. - - - . 




1.8 






3.3 









SUMMARY. 

In these five tables are shown the relations of second generation to 
immigrant groups and to the group of persons native-bom of native 
father. Without entering into so aetailed a study as that made of the 
data from the New York court of general sessions, the salient facts 
brought out by these figures may be briefly summarized. 

Those instances in which the second generation follows the rule of 
movement toward the native-bom of native father are shown in the 
five tables appended. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



85 



Table 53. — Deviation of ike second generation from the immigrant in the direction of the 
7wtive-bom of native father: MasMchusetts penal institutions, October i, 1908 , to Sep- 
tember SO, 1909. 

CLASSES OF CRIME. 



Qainful 
offenses. 



Offensaa 

of 
personal 
violence. 



Offenses 
against 
publk: 
policy. 



Offenses 
against 
chastity. 



NatiTe bora of native father.. 
Canadian: 

ImnUmnt 

Second generation 

English: 

immigrant 

Second generation. 

German: 

Immlnant 

Seeond generation 

Irish: 

I mmlgrant 

Second generation 

Scotch: 

Immigrant 

Second generation. 



20.6 



11.5 
18.7 



7.5 
14.4 



4.4 

10.0 

8.4 
14.0 



5.3 



(«) 

(«) 
(•) 



7.7 
4.0 



3.0 
3.6 



(«) 



68.0 



76.2 
70.7 



81.9 
75.6 



67.1 
60.0 



90.0 
83.5 



85.6 
78.2 



3.8 



5.0 
3.7 






1.1 
L6 



1.8 
8.3 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 



ary. 


Forgery 

and 

fraud. 


Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen 

property. 


Robbery. 


3.2 


0.8 


15.9 


a? 


1.3 

3.7 




9.5 
14.5 




.8 
3.2 


.2 
.2 


6.5 
10.8 




1 9 
3.0 


1.3 
.5 




lio 


.4 
1.5 


.1 
.2 


3.8 
8.1 




.0 
2.2 


.2 
.8 


8.0 
9.2 


1.8 



Natlve-bom of native (kther. 
Canadian: 

Inunlgzant 

Second generation. 

English: 

Immiflant. 

Second generation.. . . ... . 

German: 

Imminant , 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immigrant. 

Second generation 

Scotch: 

Immlnant 

Second generation. 



OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE 



Simple 
assault. 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


4.7 


0.23 


a 21 


an 


lii 


.19 
.26 


.26 
.09 


^l 


4.9 
4.3 


.29 
.00 


(b) 
lb) 


.1 

.00 


7.1 
4.0 


^] 


.65 
.00 


^] 


2.2 
3.4 


.71 
.11 


.03 
.07 


^] 


^l 


g] 


(b) 
(6) 


18 



Natlve-bom of native father. 
Canadian: 

Imminant 

Second generation 

Enidlsh: 



Second generation. 
German: 

Immlnant 

Second generation. 
Irish: 

Immlnant 

Second generation. 
Scotch: 

Immlnint 

Second generation. 



• Exception to the rale. 

h No commitments for this crime of either the immigrant or second generation group- 



Digitized by 



Google 



86 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 53. — Deviation of the second generationjrom the immigrant in the direction of the 
native-bom of native father: MassachuseUs penal imtitutionSj October 1, 1908 ^ to Sep- 
tember SOy 1905— -Continued. 

OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 



Dtaor- 

deriy 

conduct. 



Drank- 



Oftmlng. 



Va- 
grancy. 



I 



Kative-bom of oatiTe father 
Canadian: 

Immioant 

Seoona generation 

EngUsb: 

Imminant 

Second generation 

Qerman: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

Scotch: 

Immioant 

Second generation 



2.5 



4.7 
3.3 



4.4 

2.1 



2.7 
2.2 



4.8 
2.0 



53.5 



64.4 
65.7 



68.0 
6a5 



47.1 
51.0 



82.4 
75.2 



74.8 
66.1 



a4 

.04 
.00 

.00 
.57 

.00 
.50 

.05 ! 
.22 



f^ 



4.4 



2.0 
4.2 



4.3 

7.0 






Z5 

a.1 



S.6 
5.5 



CRIMES OP PROSTITUTION. 



Crimes 
of pn»- 
tituttoo. 



Native-bom of native father 

Canadian: 

Immigrant 

Second generation .' 

En^ish: 

immimnt '. 

Second generation 

German: 

Imminant 

Second generation 

Irish: 

Immimint 

Second generation 

Scotch: 

Immigrant 

Second generation 

• Exception to the rule. 

k No commitments for thi» crime of either the immigrant or second generation groujK 



as 



1.3 
.6 



LI 
.6 



.0 
.6 



.1 
.2 



.2 
.4 



Digitized by 



Google 



Chapter VIII. 



ISTEW TOBK CITT Ain) STATE. 

The State of New York had in 1900 the largest foreign population, 
considered numerically, of any State in the Union. It contained 
1,900,425 persons of foreign birth^ or nearly one-fifth (18.17 per 
cent) of the total number in the United States. Of the six great 
cities of the country New York had the largest proportion of foreign- 
born, 37 per cent, or a total of 1,270,080 persons. These facts make 
the study of immigrant crime in New York City and State of prime 
importance. 

Note. — Beyond the comparison of immigrants and natives in the gross lies the 
fact of the heterogeneity of the immigrant group. This group is composed of many 
races, some few of which, because of excessive numerical representation and the 
unique character of their criminality, may perhaps largely determine the relations 
which the group as a whole bears to the American-bom . Thus the comparison of these 
various immigrant races with the American is highly important. 

The data upon which this investigation is based affords but a meager field for the 
comparison of races. Onlv 2,206 of the cases obtained from the New York court of 
general sessions, and 12,851 of the cases of alfens in penal institutions obtained 
from the Bureau of Immigration are by race, and among the latter no American-bom 
persons appear. In all other sets of data the classification of offenders is either by 
country oi birth or by ** nationality." The latter term is that employed by the 
Chicago police department and is a modification of the former, in that gec^raphical 
divisions ratlier man political entities are made the basis of classification. For 
convenience, "nationality" is used in the discussion of the data in place of "coimtry 
of birth," and this interpretation of the term should be made in every case except 
that of the Chica^ data, where, as will be more fully explained later, it has a 
slightly different significance in certain instances. 

Because of the widely different character of the data obtained from the various 
sources, it is impossible to combine all cases into a composite group. Each set of 
data must be separately analyzed and its purely local significance bome in mind. 
Each set is a umt, unrelated to any other, and represents merely a certain definite 
number of cases. Each of these sets of data will now be subjected to separate analysis. 
They have been arranged in the following order: (1) New York City and State — 
(a) Sew York City magistrates' courts, (b) New York City children's courts, (c) New 
York court of general sessions, (d) county and supreme courts of New York State; 
(2) Chicago — Police arrests; and (3) Massachusetts — Commitments to penal institu- 
tions. 

The classification of New York's population by principal countries 
of birth is shown for 1900 in the tatle following: 

Table 54. — Populatum of New York City^ 1900, by country of birth. 



Country of birth. 


Number. 


Country of birth. 


Number. 


United States: 

WMte 


2,108,980 
68,142 


Foreign countries— Continued. 

Ireland 


275,102 


Colored o ; 


Italy 


145,433 
11,387 
32,873 




Norway •••... 


Foreign countries: 


71,427 
15,055 
19,399 
2,627 
5,621 
68,836 
14,756 
822,343 
81,516 


Poland 


Austria 


Russia 


155,201 


TV>>^«mlft 


Scotland 


19,836 


Canada (En«Ush) 


Sweden 


28,320 


Canada I French )' 


other countries 


50,449 


Denmark 


Total native-born 




Enidand ............. .............. 


2,167,122 
1,270,080 


France 


Total foreign-bom ................ 


Qermany 


Total population .. ..........,,,. 


Hungary. 


8,437,202 







• Persons of negro descent, Chinese, Japanese, and Indians. 



87 



Digitized by 



Google 



88 The Immigration Commission. 

To compare these figures with those of crime is not advisable. 
Criminal statistics are so much affected by the factors of age and sex 
that to make population statistics strictly comparable with them is 
impossible without more complete data than the census reports 
aflFord. It is therefore well to use the population figures given above 
merely as a background for the analysis of the statistics of crime, 
without attempting any correlation of the two. 

For the study of immigrant criminality in New York Qty and 
State, data have been collected from the following sources: (1) New 
York City magistrates' courts; (2) New York City children's courts ; 
(3) New York City court of gefieral sessions; (4) county and supreme 
courts of New York State. 

The first three sets of data concern New York City alone; the fourth 
concerns the entire State. Three of these sets of data are analyzed 
in the following pages, the data from the New York Citv children's 
courts alone being presented among the general tables without 
analysis. 

1. New York City Magistrates' Courts, 
compilation of data. 

The most comprehensive records of crime m the city of New York 
are those of the citv magistrates' or poUce courts. Of these there 
are two divisions, the first covering the boroughs of Manhattan and 
the Bronx, the second, the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and 
Richmond, and each division consisting of several different courts. 
A vast number of cases come before these courts each year and cover 
the greater part of the city's detected criminality. 

The records of both divisions of the courts for the calendar years 
from 1901 to 1908, inclusive, have been gathered into a single com- 
pilation, thus giving a summary of criminal cases for these eight 
vears. * In arra aging the recorcfa for analysis, only those cases have 
been used which show the accused person to have been committed to 
a reformatory or other institution as guilty of the offense charged, or 
held for further trial bj^ a higher court. Thus the tables prepared 
include only cases in which guilt was evident or highly probable. 

During the eight years under investigation the total number of 
such cases disposed of bv these courts was 785,824.* Not all of 
these, however, admit or inclusion in the analysis. In 14,154 of 
them the crime charged was so vaguely defined that it could not be 
classified. These 14,154 cases are therefore excluded from the num- 
ber to which analysis is confined. This reduces the total number of 
cases covered by the analysis to 771,670. 

a The records of the night courts, the courts of special sessions, and the children's 
courts have not been included in this compilation. 

^This does not include all cases coming before these courts; only those in which 
the accused was either committed to a penal institution or held for further trial. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 89 

These 771,670 cases have bee^ classified according to the nature of 
the crime charged as follows : 



Offenses. 


Number 
of cases. 


Peroent 
oftotaL 




61,670 

31,606 

669,263 

6,000 

4; 087 


7.9 


fHTeniws of penvonal vidwioe 


4.1 


Offenses afsainst public policy 


86.7 


Offen^M Against chMtity . . .'. 


.7 


Uncliffsifled ofTensfis ._.. 


.6 








Tot«»l 


771,670 


loao 







The largest group of oflFenses is that ill-defmed one ''against public 
policy, " which covers so wide a field of forbidden acts that conclusions 
regarding it as a group must be made with considerable reservation. 
Tne nunioer of cases against public policy may have some effect upon 
the computation of the proportions of otner offenses among the 
various nationalities, but this is unavoidable, and all that can be 
done is to bear in mind that the total of all offenses, upon which 
these proportions of specific crimes and classes of crime are based, 
may be largely influenced by this one ill-defined group. 

tn analyzing these figures only the first four offense groups need 
be discussed. This leaves a small residue of unclassi&d offenses, 
which are of such a character that they give Uttle indication of their 
exact criminal nature. It has been found impossible satisfactorily to 
classify them, and the}^ have therefore been omitted from the special 
analysis although retained in the total of offenses. This group is 
so small, however, among offenders of every nationality, that its 
effect upon the relation of other offenses to the total is of practically 
no importance. 

The records of the city magistrates' courts do not show the race 
of the offender; only his country of birth. In the discussion of these 
records, therefore, country of birth, or nationaUty, must be the 
basis 01 comparison. It should be borne in mind that no reference 
to race is made in the treatment of these statistics from the city 
magistrates' courts; the term ** nationality" is that most frequently 
employed and means no more than nativity, or country of birth. 
The failure to separate the group of offenders of American birth 
into divisions of whites and negroes and of persons of native and 
foreign parentage somewhat lessens the value of this group as a true 
nonimmigrant comparative standard. But for purposes of gross com- 
parison it must serve, although it is a group into which unmigrant 
ethnic factors doubtless largely enter. The second generation — the 
children of inunigrants — undoubtedly compose a large part of it, yet 
inasmuch as it is constituted entirely of persons of native birth, 
comparison of the various inamigrant groups with it is of value. 

Or the groups of foreign-born offenders, those from only seven 
countries are clearly marked in the records of all the city magistrates' 
courts. 

79340*— VOL 30—11,2 7 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



90 



The Immigration Commission. 



CLASSES OF CBIME. 

The distribution of the several classes of crime among these nation- 
ality groups is shown in the following table: 

Table 55. — DxstribtUion of classes of crime: New York City magistrates* courts, Jat^ 
uary 1, 1901, to December 31, 1908. 

NUMBER. 



Country of birth of offender. 


Total. 


Gainful 
offenses. 


Offenses 
of per- 
sonal 

violence. 


Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
chastity. 


Undassi. 

fied 
offenses. 


United States 


365,386 


36,764 


14,292 


310,321 


2,066 


1,943 






England 


15,445 
8,464 

52,193 
110,085 

67,125 

57,328 
6,476 


1,266 
363 
3,999 
4,796 
4,312 
4784 
358 


545 
139 
2,288 
4,117 
4,873 
1,906 
171 


13,495 
7,596 

44,968 
100,445 

56,974 

49,811 
5,911 


78 
348 
631 
166 
542 
510 

18 


71 


ynniw . ... . r , ^t ,tt ,-,^- 


18 


Qermany 


357 


TTftlftn'1 . . , 


Ml 


Italy 


494 


Riusia 


310 


^cotlan'^ 


18 






Total foreign 


402,772 


24,635 


17,141 


365,905 


2,960 


2,1U 




Orand total 


768,158 


61,399 


31,433 


666,226 


5,046 


4,054 







PER CENT OP TOTAL NUMBER. 



United States. 



Engtad.. 
Fruioe.... 
Qermany. 
Ireland... 
Italy. 



Scotland 

Total foreign., 
Orand total.. 



loao 



loao 
loao 

100.0 
100.0 

loao 
loao 
loao 



loao 



100.0 



lai 



8.1 
4.8 
7.7 
4.4 

6.4 
&3 
5.5 



6.1 



8.0 



8.9 



3.5 
1.6 
4.3 
3.7 
7.3 
3.8 
2.6 



4.3 



4.1 



84.9 



87.4 
89.7 
86.2 
91.2 
84.9 
86.9 
91.8 



88.4 



86.7 



as 



.5 
.2 
.7 
.5 
.6 
.5 
.3 



.5 
^5 



From this table it appears that one class of crime plaj^s a larger 
part in the criminaUty of American-born persons than in that of 
njxj nationality group of immigrants. This is the class of offenses 
designated as ^'gainnil.'' Of the total number of offenses com- 
mitted by persons born in the United States 10.1 per cent were of 
this character. The highest percentage which the gainful offenses 
form of the total crimes of any foreign nationaUty is 8.3 per cent, 
that being their percentage or the crimes of immigrant offenders 
bom in Kussia. The proportion which such offenses form of the 
total crimes of fjersons of English birth is nearly as large, being 8.1 
per cent. Next in rank is the percentage of persons born m Germany, 
7.7, and following this are the percentages of the Italians, 6.4, the 
Scotch 5.5, ihe Irish, 4.4, and the French, whose percentage of 4.3 
is least of the eight nationaUty groups shown. 

Offenses of personal violence, against pubUc poUcy, and against 
chastity form larger proportions of the total criminfiility of various 
groups of inmiigrant offenders than of that of the Amencan-bom. 

Two of the immigrant groups have larger percentages of offenses of 
personal violence than the group of persons born in the United States. 
These two immigrant nationahties are the ItaUan, of whose crimes 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



91 



those of personal violence form 7.3 per cent, and the Germans, 4.3 
per cent of whose offenses are of this nature. All other immigrant 
groups have smaller proportions of such crimes than the native-bom, 
of wnose total offenses they form 3.9 per cent. The most striking 
thing shown by these figures is the relatively high percentages of 
offenses of personal violence found among the Italians; this percent- 
age is nearly twice as great as that of the Americans, and over four 
and one-half times that of the French, whose percentage of 1.6 is least 
of the eight nationality groups shown. 

Bdativefreqiwricy of gainful offenses: New York City magistrcUet^ courts^ 1901-1908. 



COUNTRY OF BIRTH 



UNITED STATES 

RUSSIA 

ENGLAND 

GERMANY 

ITALY 

SCOTLAND 

IRELAND 

TRANCE 




Of offenses against public policy no nationality has a smaller pro- 
portion than the American, 84.9 per cent of whose crimes are of this 
character. Witli the exception oi the Italian, whose percentage is the 
same as that of the American-bom group, all of the foreign nationali- 
ties have larger proportions. The nighest percentage is that of the 
Scotch, 91.3 per cent of whose offenses are against pubUc policy. 
This, however, is only slightly in excess of that of the Irish, the latter 
being 91.2 per cent. 



Digitized by 



Google 



92 



The Immigration Commission. 



Four of the seven foreim nationaUties have larger proportions of 
oflFenses against chastity than the American. These are the French, 
4.1 per cent of whose crimes are against chastity, the Germans, whose 
percentage is 1.2, the Russian, of whose total offenses these form 0.9 
per cent, and the Italian, 0.8 per cent of whose crimes is composed of 
such offenses. The American percentage, 0.6, is only half that of the 
Germans and only slightly more than one-seventh that of the French. 
The Irish and the Scotch percentages are less than any others, the 
former being 0.2 and the latter 0.3. It is noteworthy that the four 
English-speaking nationalities, the, American, English, Irish, and 
Scotch, are exceeded in relative frequency of offenses against chastity 
by each of the four non-English-speaking nationaUties. 

GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

In the following table are shown the several gainful offenses, their 
distribution among the nationalities, and the proportion which each 
forms of the total crimes of each nationality: 

Table 66. — Gainjul offenus compared with all offenses: New York City magistrattB* 

courts, 1901 to 1908. 

NUMBER. 





AU 
offenses. 


Gainful offenses. 


Country of birth of offender. 


Black- 
mail 
and ex- 
tortion. 


Bur- 
glary. 


Forgery 

and 

fraud. 


Larceny 
and re* 
oeiving 
stolen 
prop- 
erty. 


Robbery. 


Total. 


United States 


365.386 


102 


7,221 


413 


27.009 


2.019 


36.754 






Knglsnd.. . 


15,446 
8,464 

52,193 
110.085 

67,125 

67,323 
6.476 


9 
7 
12 
U 
116 
14 
1 


161 
49 
657 
759 
910 
860 
32 


23 
4 
75 
17 
22 
42 
6 


1.020 
281 
3.120 
3.713 
2,978 
3.685 
306 


43 
22 
135 
296 
286 
174 
14 


1,256 


France 


363 


Qermv^nj ,,..,.-. 


3.999 


Ireland 


4,796 


Itaiy 


4,312 


Russia 


4,784 


Scotland 


358 






Total foreign 


402.772 


185 
287 


4.180 


272 


18,795 


1.203 


24.635 






Grand total 


768,158 


11,401 


685 1 45.804 


3,222 


61,389 











PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



United States 


100.0 


ao3 


2.0 


0.11 


7.4 


0.6 


10.1 






England....... . . r. r.--, 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


.06 
.06 
.02 
.01 
.17 
.02 
.02 


LO 
.6 

L3 
.7 

1.4 

L5 
.5 


.15 
.06 
.14 
.02 
.03 
.07 
.09 


6.6 
3.3 
6.0 
3.4 
4.4 
6.4 
4.7 


.3 
.3 
.3 
.3 
.4 
.3 
.2 


8-1 


France 


4.3 


Oennany 


7.7 


Ireland.'. 


4.4 


Italy..'. 


6.4 


Russia 


8.3 


Scotland 


5.5 






Total foreign ............... 


100.0 


.05 


1.0 


.07 


4.7 


.3 


6.1 






Grand total 


100.0 


.04 


L6 


.09 


6.0 


.4 


8.0 







Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 93 

The number of cases of blackmail and extortion is small compared 
with the number of other crimes shown in this table, but it ispossible 
to contrast the various nationalities with respect to them. Tne Ital- 
ians stand out most prominently in the records of these oflFenses: 
although only 0.17 per cent of their crimes consist of blackmail and 
extortion, no other nationality has half so large a proportion. The 
percentage of the French mosl nearly approaches that of the Italians, 
and it is only 0.08. The Italians, French, and English exceed the 
Amepcan-bom in relative frequency of these crimes, while the per- 
centage of the latter, which is 0.03, is greater than that of the four 
remaining foreign groups. The German, Russian, and Scotch groups 
have each 0.02 per cent, while the Irish J)ercentage, 0.01, is least of 
the eight shown in the table. 

Burglary occurs in largest proportion among the crimes of the 
American-bom, forming 2 per cent of their oiBFenses. The Russians 
are next in rank, 1.5 per cent of their crimes consisting of burglary. 
Only sUghtly smaller than the Russian percentage is the Italian, 
which is 1.4, and the German, which is 1.3. Three nationalities have 
less than 1 per cent, the Irish, with 0.7 per cent, the French, with 0.6 
per cent, and the Scotch, with 0.5 per cent, the latter having the 
smallest percentage of any of the eignt nationalities. 

Forgery and fraud form very small proportions of the criminality 
of the several nationalities. Of these proportions the group of 
English- bom persons has the largest, or 0.15 per cent. Next in rank 
is wie proportion belonging to tne Germans, which is 0.14 per cent. 
These are the only inamigrant groups whose percentages or forgery 
and fraud are more than the percentage found in the American-bom 
group, which is 0.11. With the exception of the English, German, 
and American nationahties no group of offenders has as larffe a pro- 
portion of these crimes as one-tentn of 1 per cent, while tne Irish, 
whose proportion is smallest of all the nationalities, has only 0.02 
per cent. 

Larceny and receiving stolen property form a larger proportion, 
7.4 per cent, of the crimes of American-bom offenders than of those 
of any immigrant group. The English percentage, which is 6.6, is 
next m rank, while the Russian percentage is only slightly smaller 
than the EngUsh, being 6.4. Two of the immigrant groups have 
percentages that are less than half that of the American-bom. These 
two groups are the Irish, of whose crimes larceny and receiving stolen 
property form 3.4 per cent, and the French, of whose total crimes 
they form 3.3 per cent, or a less proportion than that found in any 
other group. 

Robbery, like burglary and larceny and receiving stolen property, 
occurs in larger proportion among the crimes of Americans than 
among those of any immigrant nationahty group. Of the total 
number of American cases shown in these records, 0.6 per cent con- 
sists of robbery. The highest percentage of this offense found in any 
immigrant group is the ItaUan, whicn is 0.4. The percentage of 
each of the other foreign nationalities, except the Scotca, is half that 
of the American-b^m, or 0.3, while the Scotch percentage, which is 
least of all, is only 0.2, or one-third the American percentage. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



94 



The Immigration Commission. 



OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

The distribution of the several offenses of personal violence among 
the various nationalities is shown in the following table, together 
with the proportion which each forms of the total crimes of each 
nationality: 

Table 57. — OffeToes of personal violence compared with all offenses: New York City 
magistrates' courts, 1901 to 1908, 

NUMBER. • 





All 
offenses. 


Offenses of personal violenoe. 


Country of birth of offender. 


Abduc- 
tion and 
kidnap- 
ping. 


Assault, 
simple. 


Assault, 
violent. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


Totd. 


United States 


365.386 


145 


8,864 


3,063 


1,738 


482 


14,2tt 






En^nd 


15,445 
8,464 

52,193 
110,085 

67.125 

57,323 
6,476 


3 

4 
20 

6 
104 
48 

1 


345 
82 
1,402 
2,666 
1,982 
1,218 

108 


92 
37 
480 
874 
2,102 
427 
40 


82 
14 
257 
543 
452 
164 
15 


23 
2 
70 
28 
233 
51 
7 


545 


France 


139 


Oermany 


2,2» 
4,117 
4,873 
1,908 
171 


Ireland 


Italy 


Russia 


Scotland 








A{!fl,m 


248 


9,720 


4,806 


1,856 


511 


17,141 




Grand total 


768,158 


393 


18,584 


7,869 


3,504 


903 


31,433 





PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



United States 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


0.04 

.02 
.05 
.04 

.08 
.02 


2.4 

2.2 
1.0 
2.7 
2.4 
3.0 
2.1 
1.7 


0.8 
3!l 


0.5 

.5 
.2 
.6 
.5 
.7 
.3 
.2 


0.13 


3.9 






Enslaiid 


.15 
.02 
.13 
.03 
.35 
.00 
.11 


3.5 


France 


1 6 


Oermany 


4.3 


Ireland 


3.7 


Italy 


7-3 


Ru^ia V 


3.3 


Scotland 


2.6 






Total foreign 


100.0 


.06 


2.4 


1.2 


.5 


.13 


4.3 






Grand total.... XX x.xx 


100.0 


2.4 


1.0 


.5 


.13 


4.1 







a Less than 0.01 per cent 

Although only 393 cases of abduction and kidnaping are shown 
by these records, the relatively large number of them belonging to 
Italian offenders is striking. One hundred and four of these 393 
cases are those of Italians. These 104 cases form 0.15 per cent of all 
Italian crimes; a very small proportion, but much in excess of that 
of any other nationality, being nearly twice the Russian percentage, 
which is 0.08, and three times the French percentage, which is 0.05. 
These three nationaUties, the Italian, Russian, and French, exceed the 
American in percentage of abduction and kidnaping; the German 
percentage is the same as the American, which is 0.04: while the 
English, Irish, and Scotch percentages are less than the American. 
The smallest proportion of these crimes is found among the Irish, 
whose six cases of abduction and kidnaping form less than five one- 
hundredths of 1 per cent of their total crimes. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



95 



The Italian percentage of simple assault; like that of abduction 
and kidnaping, is greater than the percentage of any other nationaUtv. 
Of the total number of Italian crmies, 3 per cent consist of simple 
assault. Next in rank to the Italian is the German percentage. This 
is 2.7. These two nationalities are the only .ones naving larger pro- 
portions of simple assault than the American, 2.4 per cent or whose 
criminality is composed of this oflfense. The Irish percentage is the 
same as the American, but the English, French, Russian, and Scotch 

EeUxHve frequency of offenses of personal violence: New York City maglstraUt^ courts^ 

1901-1908, 



COUNTRY OF BIRTH 


5 10 




1 




ITALY 


■I 




GERMANY 


■ 






UNITED STATES ■! 




IRELAND ^m 




ENGLAND Wlk 




RUSSIA H 


' 


SCOTLAND ■ 




FRANCE 1 





percentages are all smaller. Of the crimes of the French, simple 
assaiilt forms the smallest proportion, 1 per cent. 

In the classification of crimes employed here, ''violent assault" 
includes only the oflfenses of felonious assault and maiming. It is 
therefore a much more serious crime than ''simple assault." 

In the case of every nationality except one violent assaidt forms 
less than 1 per cent of the total cruninahty. This unique nationality 
is the Italian, of whose total offenses violent assault forms 3.1 per 



Digitized by 



Google 



96 The Immigration Commission. 

cent. The percentage next in rank, that of the German group, is 
less than one-thkd as large, being 0.9. The Italian and German are 
the only nationalities having larger percentages than the American, 
of whose total crimes violent assault forms 0.8 j>er cent. The Irish 
percentage, however, is the same as the American. The smallest 
proportion of violent assault is found among the French, only 0.4 
per cent of whose crimes consist of this oflfense. 

Homicide, also, forms a larger proportion of Italian crimes than of 
the crimes of any other nationality, 0.7 per cent of the offenses of 
Italians consisting of homicide. No other nationalitv has a larger 
percentage of this crime than the American, althougn the English, 
German, and Irish percentages are each the same as the American. 
The French and Scotch have smaller percentages (each being 0.2) than 
any other nationalities. These two nationalities and the Russian 
are the only ones whose proportion of honucide is less than that ci 
the American-born. 

Rape^ like the other offenses of personal violence, appears in largest 
proportion among the Italians. Of the total number of Italian cases 
recorded in the city magistrates' courts, 0.35 per cent are cases of 
rape. This percentage, smaU though it appears, is more than twice 
that of the English (0.15). which stands second in rank. The Italian 
and English are the onljr nationalities whose percentage of rape 
exceeds that of the American, the latter being 0.13. The German 
percentage, however, is the same as the American. The relatively 
small proportion of rape appearing in the criminality of the French 
is striking., Only two cases of rape, or 0.02 per cent of their total 
crimes, are attributed to French offenders. 

OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

Certain offenses have been selected from the group of "offenses 
against public policy" for further analysis. These are offenses which 
occur in relatively large numbers and which are clearly defined enough 
to make their part in the criminality of the various nationalities of 
importance. The offenses thus selected are shown in the following 
table with the proportions which they form of the total crimes of 
each nationality group of offenders. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



Inunigration and Crime. 



97 



Table 68. — Offenses against pvhlic policy compared with all offenses: New York City 
magistrates' cowrts, 1901 to 1908. 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Offenses against public policy. 


Country of birtb. 


Dis- 
orderly 
conduct. 


Intoxicik 
tion. 


Vagran- 
cy, tru- 
ancy, and 
incorrigi- 
bility. 


Violation 
of corpo- 
ration or- 
dinances. 


Violation 
of sani- 
tary law. 


Other 
offenses 
against 
pubUc 
poUcy. 


Total. 


United States 


365,386 


123,809 


123,680 


17,549 


28,976 


6,064 


15,263 


310,321 






Fngtirnd . . . , ,_ 


15,445 
8,464 

52,193 
110.065 

67,125 

57,323 
6,476 


3,650 
5005 
14,741 
26,330 
15,126 
18,388 
1,092 


7,318 
1308 
15,462 
60,074 
6,303 
2,028 
3,913 


1,002 

235 

3,262 

6,993 

1,071 

763 

373 


757 
306 

3,869 
2,629 
26,693 
18,496 
304 


224 
127 
3,069 
1,078 
8,681 
6,183 
90 


544 

616 
4,565 
3,341 
4,200 
3 961 

139 


13,496 

7696 

44,968 

100,446 


France 


Germany 


Ireland 


Italy 


66,974 


RlMfflA 


49,811 
6,911 


Pwtlftnd ... . . 






Total foreign 


402,772 


102,742 


110,097 


15,680 


87,615 


18,277 


21,494 


855,906 


Grand toUl 


708,158 


226,551 


233,777 


33,229 


111,591 


24,331 


36,747 


666,226 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



United States 


100.0 


33.9 


33.8 


4.8 


6.6 


1.7 


4.2 


84.9 






England 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


28.6 
69.1 
28.2 
23.9 
22.6 
32.1 
16.9 


47.4 
15.5 
29.6 
64.6 
9.4 
3.5 
60.4 


6.6 
2.8 
6w2 
6.4 
1.6 
1.3 
6.8 


4.9 
3.6 
7.4 
2.4 
39.6 
32.3 
4.7 


1.6 
1.6 
6.9 
1.0 
5.6 
10.8 
1.4 


3.6 
7.3 
8.7 
3.0 
6.3 
6.9 
2.1 


87.4 


France 


89.7 


nermany 


86.2 


Irplftnd . . 


91.2 


Italy 


84.9 


Rtwsia 


86.9 


8cotlfind X . X . 


91.3 






Total foreign 


100.0 


26.6 


27.3 


3.9 


21.8 


4.6 


5.3 


88.4 


Grand total 


loao 


29.6 


30.4 


4.3 


14.5 


3.2 


4.8 


86.7 



Of these offenses not one forms so large a proportion of American 
crime as of the criminality of one or more immigrant groups. 

The largest proportion of disorderly conduct is that of the French, 
of whose crimes it forms 59.1 per cent. This is a much larger per- 
centage than that foimd in any other group of offenders, for while 
disorderly conduct composes a good deal more than half of all offenses 
committed by persons of French birth, it comprises less than one-third 
of the crimes of each of the other nationalities except the American. 
Of the crimes of Americans, disorderly conduct forms only 33.9 per 
cent, or slightly more than one-third of the total. The French is 
the only immigrant group whose percentage of this offense exceeds 
the American. The percentages of the other foreign nationalities 
range from 32.1, which is that of the Russians, to 16.9, which is that 
of the Scotch. The Russian percentfage is thus only slightly less 
than the American, while the ocotch percentage is only one-half as 
large as the American. 

Three of the immigrant groups have la^er proportions of intoxica- 
tion cases than the American bom. These three groups are the 
Scotch, 60.4 per cent of whose crimes consist of intoxication, the 
Irish, 54.6 per cent of whose crimes are of like character, ana the 
English, of whose total offenses intoxication forms 47.4 per cent. The 
American percentage is 33.8. The four nationalities enumerated 



Digitized by 



Google 



98 



The Inunigration Commissioii. 



are the only ones more than one-third of whose crimes consist of intoxi- 
cation; while two of the nationalities shown in the preceding table 
have less than 10 per cent. These two nationalities are the Italian, 
with 9.4 per cent, and the Russian^ with only 3.5 per cent. One of the 
most striking things shown by this table is the fact that all of the 
English-speaking nationalities have larger proportions of intoxication 
cases than the non-English-speaking. 

VaCTancy, truancy, and incorri^bility. which are grouped together, 
form larger proportions of the cnmes of the English, Irish, German, 
and Scotch than of the crimes of Americans. The percentages of 
these nationalities are, in descending order: 

Engliflh 6.5 

Iridi 6.4 

Gennan 6. 2 

Scotch 5. 8 

American 4. 8 

Edative frequency of intoxication: New York City magittnUet^ courts 1901^1909. 




The next percentage in rank is that of the French, being 2.8. This 
is followed by the Italian, which is 1.6. and the Russian, which is 1.3, 
or only one-nf th as great as the Englisn percentage and less than one- 
third the American. 

Two nationalities stand oiit prominently in the figures showing 
violations of corporation ordinances. Nearly two-fifths of all the 
crimes of ItaUans and nearly one-third of those of Russians are of this 
character, the ItaUan percentage being 39.6 and the Russian per- 
centage 32.3. The highest proportion of such oflfenses found among 
the six remaining nationalities is only 7.4, which is that of the Grer- 
mans. Next in rank is the percentage of the American-bom group, 
which is 6.6. Three immigrant groups therefore have larger propor- 
tions of violations of corporation ordinances than the native-bom, 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



99 



while four have smaller proportions. These oflfenses form the smallest 
percentage of the crimes of the Irish, oiJ^ 2.4 per cent of whose total 
offenses belong in this category. The difference in the character of the 
criminaUty of different nationalities is strikingly shown here, the 
Italian percentage of violations of corporation ordinances oeing 
16i times the Irish percentage. Unfortunately it is impossible satis- 
factorily to determine the criminal significance of such offenses; 
they may consist of so manv acts that are not inherently criminal; but 
are so only because forbidden, that it is impossible to tell when they 
spring from mnorance and when from willful disregard of authority. 

Another offense which possibly springs from the same causes as the 
violation of corporation ordinances, and yet which is of great impor- 
tance to the immediate welfare of the community, is the violation of 
the sanitary laws. While not necessarily crimmal in nature, such 

RdaHvefreqvimcyofviolaJLionofc^ New York City magistrate^ courts, 

1901-1908, 




violations are distinctly injurious to society, in that they may jeop- 
ardize the public health. Three foreign nationaUties prove to be rel- 
atively more frequent violators of the sanitary laws than the American — 
the Russian, of whose total offenses these form 10.8 per cent, the Ger- 
mans, 5.9 per cent of whose total offenses are of this nature, and the 
ItaUan, whose percentage of these offenses is 5.5. Each of these per- 
centages is much in excess of the American, which is only 1.7. It is 
noteworthy that these three immigrant groups are the three whose 
proportions of violations of corporation ordinances are greater than 
the American. It is also notable that the nationality having the 
smallest percentage of violations of corporation ordinances likewise 
has the smallest percentage of violations of the sanitary laws. This 
nationality is the Irish. 



Digitized by VjOO^IC 



100 



The Immigration Commission. 



OFFENSES AGAINST CHASTITY. 

An examination of the various offenses ''against chastity" reveals 
the fact that those connected with disordeny houses are the most 
common. 

While it is possible for a person keeping an office for the sale of pas- 
sage tickets on vessels and raiboads in violation of the provisions 
governing such sale to be convicted of keeping a ' 'disorderly house," • 
such convictions (or arrests for such offenses) are not frequent in New 
York City, and a "disorderly house" usuall^p' means a nouse of ill- 
fame or assignation, or a place for persons to visit for unlawful sexual 
intercourse, or a "stale-beer dive," ^ and the great majority of 
"disorderly house" cases coming before the New York criminal 
courts are connected with the keeping, residence in, or use of, such 

E laces. The number of cases wnere prosecution is brought for 
eeping an office for xmlawfully dealing in passage tickets under 
the charge of keeping a "disorderly house" is so very slight in com-, 
parison with those where the "disorderly house" is one which is 
made to serve the ends of prostitution that it is negligible, and no 
hesitancy has been had in placing all cases of "disorderly house" 
under the heading of offenses against chastity and considering them 
' 'crimes of prostitution. " 

Table 59. — Offenses against chastity compared ivith all offenses: New York City magis- 
trates'^ courts, 1901 to 1908. 



NUMBER. 












AU 
offenses. 


Offenses against chastity. 


Country of birth. 


Dis- 
orderly 
house 
cases. 


AU other. 


TotaL 


United States 


365,386 


1,356 


710 


2,066 






England 


16,445 
8,464 

52,193 
110,086 

67,125 

57,323 
6,476 


48 
304 
472 

98 

354 

389 

9- 


30 
44 

159 
68 
188 
121 
9 


78 


France 


348 


Germany 


631 


Ireland 


166 


Italy 


5fi 


Russia 


510 


Scotland 


18 






Total foreign 


402,772 


2,15fi 


824 


2.980 






Grand total 


768,168 


3,512 


1,534 


5.016 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 








United States 


100.0 


a4 


a2 


ae 






England 


100.0 

loao 
loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


.3 
8.6 
.9 
.1 
.5 
.7 
.1 


.2 

.5 

.3 

.06 

.3 

.2 

.1 


.5 


Frwice 


ii 


Qennany.... 


1.2 


Ireland 


.2 


Italy 


.8 


Runla 


.9 


Rcotlanil , , 


.3 






Total foreign 


100.0 


.6 


.3 


.7 






Grand total 


100.0 


.5 


.2 


.7 







• New York Penal Code, section 621. 



» New York Peod Code, section 322. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



101 



One nationality, the French, stands out in these figures as remark- 
ably unlike all others. Not only has no other group of offenders so 
large a proportion of disorderly house cases as the French, but the 
percentage of such cases most nearly approaching the French is only 
one-fourm as large. This nationahty standing second in rank is the 
German, whose disorderlj house cases compose ouly 0.9 per cent of 
its total cases; of the cnmes of the French, 3.6 per cent are of this 
character. In addition to the French and German, there are two 
nationalities having larger percentages of these crimes than the 
American group: 'Hie Russian, with 0.7 per cent, and the Italian, 
with 0.5 per cent; the American percentage being 0.4. Tab smallest 
four percentages appearing in this table are therefore those of the 
four English-speakmg nationalities: The American, English, Irish, 
and Scotch, the latter two of which have each only one-tenth of 1 per 
cent of their crimes consisting of disorderly house cases. 

SUMMARY. 

The results of this analysis may best be sunmiarized by presenting 
a rearrangement of the tables upon which it is based, so that the nation- 
alities appear in descending order of their proportions of each crime 
and class of crime. 

Although the gainful offenses as a whole are more in evidence 
among the crimes of Americans, as shown in these records, than among 
the cnmes of any immigrant nationality, there are four nationalities 
which have larger percentages than the American of individual 
gainful offenses. In the following summary table these stand out 
clearly: 

Table 60. — Relative frequency of gainful offenses: New York City magistrates* courts^ 

1901 to 1908. 



Country of birth. 



AU gainfui ogennt. 

UdHmI Stutcs .................. 

Ruasia 

EnglADd 

Oermany 

Italy 

Scotland 

Ireland 

France 

BUekmail and ertortUm 

Italy 

Prance 

England 

United Stotes 

Germany 

Russia 

Scotland 

Ireland. 

Burgiaiy. 

United SUtet 

Russia 

Germany 

Italy 

Eoffland 

Irerand 

France 

Scotland 



Percent. 



10.1 
8.3 
8.1 
7.7 
6.4 
5.5 
4.4 
4.3 



a 17 

.06 
.06 
.03 
.02 
.02 
.02 
.02 



3.0 
1.5 
1.3 
1.4 
1.0 
.7 
.6 
.5 



Country of birth. 



Forgery and fraud. 

England , 

Oermany 

United States , 

Scotland 

Russia 

Franoe , 

luly 

Ireland 

Larceny and receiving stolen property. 

United States 

England 

Ruasia , 

GermaoT 

Scotland 

Italy 

Ireland 

France , 

Robbery. 

United Stotes , 

Italy 

England 

France 

Germany 

Ireland 

Russia 

Scotland 



Per cent 



0.15 
.14 
.11 
.09 
.07 
.05 
.03 
.02 



7.4 
6.6 
6.4 
6.0 
4.7 
4.4 
3.4 
3.3 



.4 
.3 
.3 
.3 
.3 
.3 
.2 



Digitized by 



Google 



102 



The Immigration Commission. 



This table shows that while burglary, larceny and receiving stolen 
property, and robbery are more common among the crimes of 
Americans than among those of immigrants, blaclonail and extortion 
and forgery and fraud occurred in greater proportion among the 
offenses of certain immigrant nationalities. Of blackmail and extor- 
tion, the Italian, French, and English inmaigrant offenders have larger 
percentages than the American, and of forgery and fraud, the English 
and German. 

Five of the seven immigrant groups exceed the American in per- 
centage of one or more of the offenses of personal violence. 

Table 61. — Relative frequency of offenses of personal violence: New York Oily magis- 
trates^ couTtSy 1901 to 1908. 



Country of birth. 



Percent 



Coontry of birth. 



Percent 



AU oferuei of pergonal violence. 

Italy 

Qerinany 

United States 

Ireland 

England 

RoBsia 

Scotland 

France 

AbduetUm and kidnapinff. 

Italy 

RoBsia 

Prance 

United States 

Qennanv 

England 

Scotland 

Ireland 

Simple atitt^Ut. 

Italy 

Oennanj 

United States 

Ireland 

England 

Russia 

Scotland 

France 



7.3 
4.3 
3.9 
3.7 
3.5 
3.3 
2.0 

i.e 



a 16 
.08 
.05 
.04 
.04 
.02 
.02 



(•) 



S.0 
2.7 
2.4 
2.4 
2.2 
2.1 
1.7 
1.0 



Violent aemtau 

Italy 

Oermany 

United States 

Ireland 

Russia 

England 

Scotland 

France 

Homicide. 

Italy 

United States 

England 

Germany 

Ireland 

Russia 

France 

Scotland 

Rape. 

Italy 

England 

United States 

Oermanv 

Scotland 

Russia 

Ireland 

France 



8.1 
.9 
.8 
.8 
.7 
.6 
.6 



a7 

.5 
.5 
.5 
.5 
.3 
.2 
.2 



0.S5 

.15 
.13 
.13 
.11 
.09 
.03 
.02 



• Less than 0.01 per cent 

Moreover^ as is shown by the above table, the American offenders 
have a smaller percentage of every offense of personal violence thaa 
some group of immigrant offenders. The nve immigrant groups 
which exceed the American in percentage of one or more offenses are 
the English, French, German, ItaUan, and Russian. Of these tiie 
Italian exceeds not only the American, but all other nationalities in 
percentage of every offense of personal violence. 

Of some one or more offenses against public poUcy every immigrant 
group has a larger percentage than the American. Of these offenses 
m the aggregate every nationality except the Italian exceeds the 
American in percentage. These facts are shown in detail in the 
table next submitted. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



103 



Table 62. — Relative frequency of offenses against public policy: New York City magii- 

trates^ courts, 1901 to 1908. 



Country of birth. 



Percent 



Country of birtb. 



Percent. 



AU ofennt agakat pmblie poliqf, 

Scotland 

Ireland 

Fiance 

England 

Russia 

Germany 

United Slates 

Italy 

Ditorderlf conduct. 

France 

United States 

Rossia 

Germany 

Ireland 

England 

ItaKTT. 

Scotland 

Intoxieathn. 

Scotland 

Ireland 

England 

United States 

Germany 

France 

Italy 

Russia 



91.3 
91.2 
89.7 
87.4 
86.9 
86.2 
84.9 
84.9 



59.1 
33.9 
32.1 
28.2 
23.9 
23.6 
22.5 
16.0 



60.4 
54.6 
47.4 
33.8 
29.6 
15.5 
9.4 
3.5 



Vagrancf, truancpt ^nd incorrigibilitif. 

England 

Ireland 

Qeimany 

Scotland 

United States 

France 

Italy 

Russia 

ViolatUm of corporatUm ordinances. 

Italy 

Russia 

Germany 

United States 

England 

Scotland 

France 

Ireland. 

Violation cfsanitarp laws. 

Rossia 

Germany 

Italy 

United States 

England 

France 

Scotland 

Ireland 



6.5 
6.4 
6.2 
5.8 
4.8 
2.8 
1.6 
L3 



39.6 
32.3 
7.4 
6.6 
4.9 
4.7 
8.6 
2.4 



las 

5.9 
&5 
1.7 
1.6 
1.6 
1.4 
1.0 



Offenses against chastity in the aggregate and the special offenses 
connected with disorderly houses are shown by Table 63 to have 
been more prevalent among the crimes of offenders of French, Ger- 
man, Russian, and Italian birth than among those of offenders bom 
in tJhe United States. Among the crimes of English, Irish, and 
Scotch offenders, however, they were less prevalent. 

Table 63. — Relative frequency of offenses against chastity: New York City magistrates* 

courts, 1901 to 1908. 



Country of birth. 



Percent 



Country of birth. 



Percent 



AU offenses againtt c^astitf. 

France 

Germany 

Russia 

Italy 

United States 

England 

Scotland 

Ireland 



4.1 
1.2 
.9 
.8 
.6 
.5 
.3 
.2 



Ditorderlf house. 

France 

Germany 

Russia 

Italy 

United States 

England 

Ireland 

Scotland 



3.6 
.9 
.7 
.6 
.4 
.8 
.1 
.1 



THE GREEKS IN MANHATTAN AND THE BRONX. 

In addition to the nationalities shown in the foregoinj^ tables there 
is one which appears only in the reports of the first division of the city 
ma^trates' courts. This is the Greek. Its absence from the list of 
nationalities shown by the reports of the second division of the city 
magistrates' courts makes its mclusion in the tables already analyzed 
impossible, but the large number of cases accredited to it in the reports 



Digitized by 



Google 



104 



The Immigration Commission. 



of the first division makes it worth while briefly to examine the 
character of its criminaUty. 

The first division of the city magistrates' courts includes all such 
courts in the boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx. During the 
eight years from 1901 to 1908, inclusive, there came before these 
courts 26,431 criminal cases in which the defendant was of Greek 
birth." These cases are shown by principal offenses in the following 
table: 

Table 64. — Persons bom in Greece held for trial or committed to reforvuitory or other 
institution, city maaistrates^ courts, Manhattan and the Bronx, January 1, 1901, to 
December SI, 1908, by offense. 



Offense. 



Offenses against chastity 

Offenses aialnst public policy: 

Disorderly conduct 

Intoxication 

Offenses of dishonesty 

Vagrancy and truancy 

Violation corporation ordinances 

Violation sanitary law 

All other 

Total 

Offenses against the person: 

Assault ( felony) 

Assault (misdemeanor) 

Cruelty to ctiildren 

Homicide 

Rape 

Robbery 

Total 



Number. 



15 

2,110 
180 
103 
22 
22,649 
610 
160 



25.834 



167 
4 

7 
6 
25 



Offense. 



Offenses against property: 

Blackmail and extortion 

Burglary 

Forgery 

Laroeny and receiving stolen prop- 
erty 

Malicious mischief 

Total 

Total defined offenses 

Offenses not defined , 

Otand total 



Nomber. 



2 

23 

2 

173 
5 



205 



26,322 
109 



26,431 



Excluding the 109 cases in which the offense was insufficiently 
defined, a reclassification of the crimes results as follows: 

Table 65. — Distribution of crimes of Greeks, city magistrates* courts, Manhattan and the 

Bronx, 1901 to 1908. 



Offenses. 


Number 
of cases. 


Per cent 
of total. 


Gainful offenses , , 


225 

239 

25,834 

15 

9 


0.0 


Offenses of personsU violence 


.9 


Offenses ag^alnst public policy 


96.1 


Offenses against chastity 


.1 


Unclassified 


(«) 






Total 


26.322 


100.0 







a Less than 0.05 per cent. 

The large proportion of offenses against public policy is striking. 
Such offenses constitute 98.1 per cent of the total number of crimes. 
In Table 55 it was shown that offenses against public policy com- 
pose only 86.7 per cent of the total specific crimes recorded or the 
city magistrates courts of all five boroughs of Greater New York, 
and that the largest proportion of such offenses found among the 

o Only those cases la which the defendant was committed to a penal institution 
or held for further trial are included. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 105 

crimes of any nationality was 91.3 per cent. While the criminality 
of the Greeks in Manhattan and the Bronx can not properly be com- 

gared with that of the nationalities whose crimes in all boroughs of 
rreater New York are analyzed in the preceding pages, the large pro- 
portion of Greek oflfenses against pubhc policy snown by the figures 
IS none the less not^able. 

Inauiry into the parts played in Greek criminality by various 
specinc offenses brings out the fact that 96.3 per cent of the 26,322 
cases shown above consist of only three sorts of crime, namely: 

Perotnt 

1 . Violation of corporation ordinances 86. 

2. Disorderly conduct 8. 

3. Violation of sanitary la-ws 2. 3 

96.3 

No other offense composes so much as 1 per cent of the total 
criminaUty. 

The most striking thing revealed b^ these figures is that 86 per cent 
of Greek crimes consisted of violations of corporation ordmances. 
This becomes more remarkable When reference is made to Table 58, 
in which is shown the proportion which such offenses form of the 
total crimes of each nationality recorded in the courts of all boroughs 
of the city. This shows the largest proportion to be 39.6 per cent 
(that of the Italians). This is less tnan half the Greek percentage 
for Manhattan and the Bronx given above. 

2. New Yobk Crrr Coubt of ^General Sessions. 

In order to obtain some statistics of crime which would clearly show 
the race of offenders, arrangements were made for the attendance at 
the New York court of general sessions of an agent of the Commission, 
whose business it was to learn the race of each person convicted, as well 
as his nativity. Race was thus made a part or the record of each case 
in which conviction was secured. For a period of nine months — ^from 
October 1, 1908, to June 30, 1909 — this work was carried on. 

During this period there were 2,262 convictions in the court of 
general sessions. In 22 of these the offense was insufficiently defined 
in the reports to permit of classification. The remaining 2,240 cases 
have been classined as follows: 



Offenses. 



Per cent 
of total. 




Gainful offenses 

Offenses of personal violence . . . 
Offenses against public policy . 

Offenses a^dnst chastity 

Unclassified offenses 

Total 



In all but 34 of these 2,240 cases the fact of native or foreign birth 
was discovered, and in all but 71 the race or parentage of the con- 
victed person was learned. In these statistics three general divisions 

79340*— VOL 36—11 8 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



106 The Immigration Commission. 

of convicted persons are made from the standpoint of nativity and 
parentage: (1) Native-bom of native father; (2) native-bom of for- 
eign father; (3) foreign-bom. The native-bom of native father are 
classified as white, negrO;^ and Indian. The native-bom of foreign- 
father are grouped according to the race of the father. The foreign- 
bom are separated into races. 

It thus becomes possible to compare not only natives with immi- 
grants, but also the children of natives (native-Som of native father) 
with the American-bom children of immiCTants (native-bom of for- 
eign father). It is likewise possible (and this has an important bear- 
ing upon the question of the assimilation of the immigrant races) to 
observe the difference in criminality between race groups of immi- 
grants and native-born persons of corresponding immigrant parentage. 

In 34 cases of clearly defined offenses the nativity of the offender 
is not reported. This reduces the number of cases to which analysis 
must be confined to 2,206. 

• Many of the race groups of the foreign-bom and the descent groups 
of the native-bom are represented in these statistics by so few cases 
that any attempt to compare them with the more numerous groups 
would be fruitless. ^ Therefore divisions of race or parenta^ having 
less than 20 convictions have been discarded from the list or race and 
parentage groups employed in the percent^e tables, although 
retained in the nativity totals of these tables. This leaves, however, 
in addition to the native white and negro of native parentage, foreign- 
bom English, (jerman^ Hebrew, Irish, and Italian race groups, and 
American-bom groups of corresponding parentage. 

Among the several nativity, parentage, and race groups, convic- 
tions for known crimes are distributed as follows: 

Native-bom of native father: 

White 418 

Negro 213 

IndLan 1 

Total 032 

Native-bom of foreign father, by race of father: 

English 29 

Geraian 112 

Hebrew 96 

Irish 300 

Italian 82 

Others 48 

Race of father not reported 27 

Total 694 

Foreign-bom, by race: 

English 39 

German 125 

Hebrew 247 

Irish 86 

Italian 236 

Other races 139 

Race not reported 9 

Total 880 

Nativity not reported 34 

Grand total 2,240 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



107 



In Chapter VII comparison has already been made of the five immi- 
grant races and the corresponding second generations or groups of 
American-bom children or immigrants. Beyond a restatement of 
its general results, no repetition of this comparison need be made here. 
The only material added to that upon which such comparison was 
based consists of the %ures for the American ne^o group of native 

Sarentage and the total %ures for the general nativity ana parentage 
ivisions. The analysis made of this material in the following pages 
is, however, of a different nature. In Chapter VII the object of 
inquiry was the relation of second generation crime to the crime of 
immigrants and American-bom children of native parents. In the 
present diapter attention is chiefly confined to the differences in the 
criminality of immigrant races and the native-bom of native par- 
entage. In the former the second-generation groups were the pomts 
of focus; in the latter the native wnite group of native parentage is 
the most important group. 

CLASSES OF GBIMB. 

The distribution of the four definite classes of crime among these 
nativity, parentage, and race groups is shown in the following table; 

Table W.— Distribution of classes of crime: New York court of general semionSf 
October i, 1908, to June SO, 1909, 

NUMBER. 



Gcaoenl nattvlty and race. 


TotaL 


Oalnful 
offenses. 


Offenses 
of per- 
sonal 

vlolenoe. 


Offenses 
against 
pablto 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
chastity. 


Uadassl- 

fled 
ofinses. 


WUte 


418 
213 

29 
112 

96 
300 

82 

39 
126 
247 

86 
235 


333 
149 

23 
96 
86 
234 
50 

38 
94 

210 
52 

103 


41 
51 

4 
10 

5 
87 
14 

1 

13 
21 
25 
88 


87 
U 

2 

4 
4 
18 
8 

2 
12 
12 

3 
40 


8 
2 


4 


Negro 




Native-born of foreign father, by race of 
tettier: 
Kn£Wi?>» 




OtnoBD 




2 


Hebrew 


1 
2 

1 

8 

1 

1 




blsh 


9 


Italian , 




^cUah 




German 


5 


Hebrew 


8 


Irteh 


6 


TtoHan.. 




4 








Grand total 


2,206 


1,632 


353 


171 


14 


36 






NatlTfy>lM)m of forelifn fathpr 


694 

1,326 

880 


560 

• 1,043 

580 


78 
170 
183 


41 
80 
83 


4 
9 
6 


11 


Total native-born, t r - t r r r . 


16 


y«vign-born,^ 


21 







• Includes 1 Indian. 



Digitized by 



Google 



108 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 66. — DistribtUUm of elas$e$ of crime: New York court of 
October /, 1908, to June SO, /909— Continued. 



•esftOfM, 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSB& 



QentraJ natlTtty tnd noe. 



Total. 



Gainful 
ofleoaas. 



Offenses 
of per- 



yioleooe. 



Oflentas 
against 
public 
policy. 



against 
ohasUty. 



fled 



Natlye-born of native tatber: 

White 

Negro 

Native-born of foreigQ father, by race of 
fiAber 

English 

German. 

Hebrew 

WA 



Fordgn-bom: 
^tglish... 
German.. 
Hebrew... 

Irish 

Italian... 



loao 

100.0 



100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 



79.7 
70.0 



7I».3 
86.7 
80.6 
78.0 
72.0 

84.6 
7&2 
86.0 
60.6 
43.8 



0.8 
28.9 



13.8 
&0 
&2 
12.3 
17.1 

3.6 
10.4 

8.6 
20.1 
37.4 



&9 
6.2 



6.9 
3.6 
4.2 
&0 
9k8 

&1 
9.6 
4.9 
3.6 
17.0 



a7 

.0 



LO 
.7 
L2 

7,7 
.8 
.4 



Grand total. 



100.0 



74.0 



16.0 



7.8 



.6 



Natlvi»4)om of toaifln h^her . 

Total native-born 

Foreifpi-bom. 



100.0 
100.0 
100.0 



80.7 

• 78.7 

66.9 



U.2 
12.8 
29.» 



5.9 
6.7 
9i3 



• Inoludet 1 IndlaD. 

It is shown by these figures that each class of crime forms a larger 
proportion of the total crimes of some immigrant race than of those 
of native white persons of native parentage. 

Convictions for the gainful offenses occur in larger proportion in 
two of the immigrant groups than in the native white group of native 
father. These two immigrant races are the Hebrew and the English. 
Of the crimes of the former the gainful offenses compose 85 per cent; 
of those of the latter, 84.6 per cent. Of the crimes of American whites 
of native father they compose 79.7 per cent. There are, however, 
two other groups of persons having^larger proportions than the 
American whites of native father. These are Ajnerican-bom per- 
sons of Hebrew and German parentage. In each of these groups 
the proportion of convictions of gainf m offenses is not only greater 
than in the native white group of native parentage, but greater than 
in any race group of immigrants. The largest proportion foimd in 
any group occurs in the group consisting of American-bom persons 
of Hebrew parentage, which is 89.6 per cent, or almost nine-tenths of 
the total crimes of that group. The second proportion in rank is 
that of the American-bom of German parentage, or 85.7 per cent. 

Further than this, it is striking that each group of American-bom 
persons of immigrant parentage, except that of English parentage, 
exceeds the corresponding race group of immigrants m proportion of 
convictions of gainful offenses. 

Of the severd groups shown in the foregoing table only one has less 
than half its crimes consisting of the gainful offenses. The Italian 
immigrant group is this exception; its proportion of these offenses is 
43.8 per cent, or less than half that or the American-bom group of 
Hebrew parentage, whose proportion is greatest of all groups. 

The Italian proportion, however, of offenses of personal violence 
is greater than that of any other group, 37.4 per cent of all convic- 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 109 

tions of Italians being of these offenses. The proportion of the Irish 
immigrant group is second in rank, or 29.1 per cent. The third is 
that of the German immigrant group, or 10.4 per cent. In addition 
to these three groups, tne American-bom of English, Irish, and 
Italian parentage exceed the American-bom of native parentage in 
proportion of offenses of personal violence. Each of these three 
American-bom groups of foreim parentage, however, is exceeded in 
proportion by the Irish and Itauan immigrant groups. The American 
negro group of native parentage, having a proportion of 23.9 per cent, 
exceecb all other groups of American birth and the English, German, 
and Hebrew foreign groups. The smallest proportion is that of the 
foreign-bom English, which is 2.6 per cent. 

In comparing inmi^ant and native groups with respect to offenses 
of personal violence, it is of interest to note that each immigrant race, 
except the English, has a larger proportion than the American-bom 
group of corresponding parentage. It is also striking that the largest 
proportion found in tne foreign-bom groups is that of the Italians^ 
while the largest proportion occurring in the native-bom groups is 
that of the cmldren of Italians. 

Offenses against public policy play a larger part in the criminality 
of only two of the five immigrant groups (the German and Italian) 
than in that of native whites of native parentage. Of the five Ameri- 
can-bom groups of immigrant parentage, that of Italian parentage is 
the only one having a larger proportion than the American whites of 
native father. The largest proportion is that of the foreign-bom 
Italians, which is 17 per cent, while the second in rank belongs to the 
American-born of Italian parentage, being 9.8 per cent. The per- 
centage of the foreign-bom Germans (9.6) is third in rank, and that 
of the native-bom of native father, which is 8.9, is fourth. The 
American-born negroes of native father are exceeded in percentage 
of offenses against public policy by six groups — the native-bom of 
native father, the native-bom of English, Insh^ and Italian father, 
and the fore^-bom Germans and Italians, while the percentage of 
the foreign English ecjuals that of the American negroes of native 
parentage. The foreign-bom Irish have the smal&t proportion 
found in any group, 3.5 per cent, although that of the American-bom 
of German parentage is only slightly greater, being 3.6 per cent. 

Only 14 convictions of offenses against chastity appear in these 
records. American-bom persons of English and German parentage 
and foreign-bom persons of the Irish and Italian races have no 
convictions of this character. By far the largest proportion of them 
found in any of the other groups is that occurring m the group of 
foreign-bom English, whose three convictions of offenses agamst 
chastity compose 7.7 per cent of the total conviction of the group. 
The second proportion in rank is that of the American bom of Italian 
father, or 1.2 per cent, while the third is found in the group of Ameri- 
can bom of Hebrew father, or 1 per cent. In addition to those groups 
having no convictions of offenses against chastity the foreign Hebrew 
is the only one having a smaller proportion than the American whites 
of native parentage, although tne second generation Irish have no 
larger proportion, both of these latter two being 0.7 per cent. 

As was pointed out in Chapter VII, second generation crime tends to 
swing away from immigrant crime in its character and take the 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



110 



The Immigratioo Commission. 



directioii followed by the criminality of the American-bom of non- 
immigrani parentage. Thus, in the foregoing table it will be observed 
that each second generation group has of each of the four classes of 
crime subjected to analysis a percentage whidi differs from the per- 
centage found in the corresponding inmiigrant group, and that this 
difference is in each second g^ieration group, except the Hebrew, in 
the direction of the percentage of the American white group of native 
parentage. 

Other exceptions than the Hebrew second gen^tttipn will be found 
when this method of comparison is appUed to the various crimes 
composing the four general classes of crune, and it will be observed 
that the Hebrew second generation in some offenses differs from the 
Hebrew immigrant group m the direction of the native white of native 
father. As detailed comparison of the immigrant and second gener- 
ation groups appearing m the records of tiie New York court of 
generalsessions luis been made in Chapter VH, no further reference to 
it need be made in the following pages. 

Examination may now be made of various specific crimes included 
in these crime groups. 

Offenses against chastity are found in such small numbers (only 14 
cases being recorded) that this examination must be confined to the 
other three groups alone. 

OAINFUL OFFENSES. 

Conviction of the several gainful offenses, which together comprise 
over three-fourths of the total numbers of convictions, are distributed 
among the nativity, parentage, and race groups as follows: 

Table ^7,— Gainful oferms compared with ali ofenau: New York eourt of gerund 
$e$$um», October i, 1908, to June SO, 2909. 

NUMBER. 





AH 




Qvmnl natiTitj and IMS. 




E2tor> 
tioo. 




Laroeny 

and 

receiving 

stotaDT 

proper^. 


Robbery. 






Fomry 

and 

tend. 


Total 


MtttTe4M)cn of natiye father 
Whlt« 


418 
2U 

» 

m 

06 
300 

82 

39 

125 
247 
86 
235 


86 

54 

6 
27 
22 
78 
S2 

3 

27 
66 
8 
28 


1 


22 
3 

1 

4 
8 

4 


215 

87 

16 
66 
55 
149 
26 

29 
67 
126 
41 
56 


10 

5 


333 




140 


neeofiftUier: 




23 


QvnOMXk 






96 


Hebrew....... 




1 
3 

1 


86 


Iilah 




234 


Ttft|fft>i 




69 


Foralgii-bonir 

FngHfif r , 




1 

10 
15 


83 


QvnOMXk 






04 


Hebrew 


1 


2 
3 

5 


210 


Trteh ,. 


53 


TtfklfM 


10 


4 


103 






Orand total 


2,206 


468 


13 


79 


1,040 


32 


1,632 






Total natlTe-bom 


1,326 
694 
880 


822 
183 
146 


2 

1 
11 


46 
21 
S3 


6S2 
350 
388 


21 
6 
U 


• 1,043 


NatlTe-born of fdreign bther 

Fonlfii-born 


660 
689 







• Indudee 1 Indian. 



Digitized by 



GoogJe 



Immigration and Crime. 



Ill 



Table 67. — Gainful offenses compared with all offenses: New York court of general 
sessions, October i, 1908 to June SO, iP09— CJontinued. 

PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 





AU 
offenses. 




Geoeral oaUvity tpd nm. 


Burglary. 


Extor- 
tion. 


Forwry 
and 
fraud. 


Larceny 

and 
receiving 

stolen 
property. 


Robbery. 


TotaL 


Native-bom of oatiye fithen 
White 


100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100 


20.8 
25.4 

2a7 
24.1 
22.0 
26.0 
39.0 

7.7 
21.6 
26.7 

9.3 
11.9 


a2 
.0 

.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 
.4 
.0 
4.8 


6.3 
L4 

8.4 
3.6 
8.3 
1.3 
.0 

2.6 
8.0 
6.1 
.0 
1.7 


51.4 
40.8 

55.2 
58.0 
57.3 
49.7 
31.7 

74.4 
45.6 
51.0 
47.7 
23.8 


2.4 
2.3 

.0 

.0 

1.0 

1.0 

1.2 

.0 

.0 

.8 

3.5 

2.1 


79.7 


Negro 


7ao 


Nativ^bora of foreign bther, by 
noeoffather: 
English 
Q^rnian.. 


79.8 

85.7 


Hebrew 


89l0 


Irlah ,.... 


7&0 


Ttftliftn 


72.0 


Foreign-bom: 

English 


84.0 


Qflnnan.... 


76.2 


Hebrew 


8&0 


Irlffh.. 


60.5 


Ttalian 


48.8 






Grand total 


100.0 


21.2 


.6 


8.6 


47.1 


1.5 


74.0 






Native-bom of foreign fiither 

Total nativfrbom 


100.0 
100.0 

loao 


26.2 
24.8 
16.6 


.1 

.2 

1.3 


3.0 
3.5 
3.8 


5a4 
40.2 
44.1 


.9 
1.6 
1.3 


80.7 
a7&7 


Foreign-bom 


66.0 








•I 


nolodes 1 1 


[ndian. 











While all of the groups of American-bom persons of immigrant 
parentage exceed the native white of native parentage in proportion 
of burglary convictions, only two of the immigrant ^oups — the 
Hebrew and German — have larger percentages. The Itdian second 
generation has the largest proportion — 39 per cent. The next in rimk 
IS that of the foreign-Bom Hebrews, 26.7 per cent, although the Irish 
second generation has almost as large a percentage (26). In the 
immigrant English group the smallest proportion appears — 7.7 per 
cent. This group and the immigrant Irish are the oniy ones having 
less than 10 per cent of their cnmes composed of burglary, the pro- 
' portion of the latter group being 9.3 per cent. 

Although every American-bom group of immigrant parentage and 
two of the five foreign-bom groups exceed the American white of 
native father in proportion of burglary, only two of the former 
groups and one of tne latter thus exceed the American negro of 
native parentage. These groups are the Irish and Italian second 
generation and the foreign-oom Hebrew. 

Only 13 cases of extortion appear in these records. Of these, 2 
are found among the convictions of the American-bom, 1 being that 
of a white person of native parentage and the other the case of a 
person of foreign parentage, but of unknown race. Among the foreign 
groups 11 cases are found; 1 is that of a Hebrew and 10 are cases of 
Italians. It is striking that out of a total of 13 convictions 11 should 
be those of immi^ants and that in 10 of these the convicted person 
should be an Itahan. 

Forgery and fraud are crimes for which 79 convictions are found; 
46 of natives and 33 of immigrants. Of the 46 natives convicted, 22 
are whites of native father and 8 are persons of Hebrew parentage. 



Digitized by 



Google 



112 The Immigration Commission. 

The 22 convictions of native whites of native father form 5.3 per cent 
of the total convictions of that group. The 8 Hebrew second genera- 
tion cases compose 8.3 per cent of the total number belonging to that 
group. Thus, of the native-bom, the group of Hebrew parentage has 
the largest proportion of convictions of forgery and fraud. A further 
examination of the figures shows that no immigrant group has so 
large a proportion, the greatest being that of the Gennans, which is 
8 per cent. Two of the mmiigrant groups, however, exceed the native 
whites of native father in percentage — the German and the Hebrew, 
the latter having 6.1 per cent. These two groups and the Hef)rew 
second generation are tne only ones having larger proportions than the 
white .^erican group of native parentage. 

Among two groups no convictions of forgery and fraud are found — 
the Italian second generation and the foreign-bom Irish. Of the 
remaining groups all except the Irish second generation have larger 
proportions than the American negro of native father, 1.4 per cent of 
whose convictions are of these crimes. 

The crimes of larceny and receiving stolen property compose 51.4 
per cent of all offenses of which native white persons of native parent- 
age were convicted. Fo'ur groups of offenders have larger proportions 
of these crimes. But of these four groups only one is composed of 
persons of foreign origin — the English. The other three consist of 
American-bom persons of English, Hebrew, and German parentage. 
The EngUsh immigrant group has by far the largest proportion; 
almost three-fourths (74.4 per cent) of the total number of English 
convictions were convictions of larceny and receiving stolen property. 
In no other group do such convictions form more than 58 per cent of 
the total number, this being the proportion found in the German 
immigrant group. The third proportion in rank is that of the Eng- 
lish second generation^ which is 55.2 per cent, or less than two-thirds 
the proportion of the immigrant English. 

In sharp contrast to their large proportions of the crimes of all 
other groups of persons is the relatively small proportion of larceny 
and receiving stolen property found in the group of Italian immi- 
grants. They form only 23.8 per cent of the total crimes of this 
froup, or less than one-third the English percentage, less than one- 
alf the percentage of the Hebrew, white American of native parent-* 
age, and Irish groups, and less than one-half the percentages found in 
all second generation groups except the Italian.^ These crimes are 
even considerably less common among the offenses of the immigrant 
ItaUans than among those of the American-bom children of immi- 
grant Italians, composing 23.8 per cent of the former and 31.7 per 
cent of the latter. Of the groups of American birth, however, the 
Itahan second generation has tne smallest proportion, and of all 
groups only the foreign-bom Italian has a smaller proportion. 

The place of the American negro group with respect to larceny and 
receiving stolen property is interesting. Of the 1 1 other groups only 
2 have smaller proportions of these crimes — the Italian immigrant 
and second-generation groups. 

Of the 32 convictions of robbery 21 are found among the native- 
born, 10 of them appearing in the white group of native father and 
forming 2.4 per cent of the total convictions of that group. Among 
the foreign-bom 11 convictions appear. While 5 of these are ox 
Italians and 3 of Irish, the proportion of the latter group is greater. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



113 



being 3.5 per cent as compared with 2.1 per cent of the former. No 
group other than the three just enumerated having a larger propor- 
tion than 1.2 per cent, the percentage of the immigrant Insh exceeds 
all others, while it alone is greater than that of the American white 
group of native parentage. The American negro group, of native 
parentage, like the Amencan white of natiare parentage, nas a larger 
proportion than any immigrant group except the Irish and a larger 
proportion than anv of the native groups composed of children of 
immigrants. The English and German immigrant and second genera- 
tion groups have no convictions of robbery. 

OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

Of the 2,206 convictions for known offenses of persons reporting 
nativity, 353, or 16 per cent, were for offenses of personal violence. 
These convictions are shown by crime, nativity, parentage, and race 
in the following table: 

Table 68. — Offennes of personal violence compared wUh aU offenses: New York court 
of general sessions^ October 1, 1908, to June SO, 1909, 

NUMBER. 



General nativity and race. 



All of- 
fenses. 



Offenses of personal violence. 



Abduc- 
tion and 

kid- 
naping. 



Assault 






Homir 
cide. 



Rape. 



Total. 



Native-bom of native father: 

White 

Nem 

Native-bom of foreign father, by race of 
father: 

English 

German 

Hebrew 

Irish 

Italian 

Foreign-bora: 

English., 

German 

Hebrew 

Irish 

Italian 



418 
213 



29 
112 

96 
300 

82 



125 
247 



235 



Grand total. 



2.206 



12 



276 



41 
61 



4 
10 

6 
37 
14 

1 
13 
21 
25 



353 



Native-born of foreign father. 

Total native-bom 

Foreign-bom 



694 


6 


60 


1,326 


8 


137 


880 


4 


139 



7 


78 


11 


170 


16 


183 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 








Native-bom of native fathen 

White 


100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


0.7 
.0 

.0 

1.8 

.0 

.0 

2.4 

.0 
.0 
.4 
L2 
.4 


7.9 
20.7 

3.4 
5.4 
4.2 
11.0 
12.2 

.0 
8.0 
6.1 
25.6 
27.2 


0.5 
2.8 

3.4 
.9 
.0 
1.0 
L2 

2.6 
2.4 
.4 
2.3 
4.7 


0.7 
.5 

6.9 
.9 

1.0 
.3 

1.2 

.0 
.0 

1.6 
.0 

5.1 


9.8 


N^fro 


23 9 


Native-bom of foreign father, by race of 
father: 
English 


13 8 


German 


8.9 


Hebrew 


5 2 


Irish 


12.3 


Italian 


17.1 


Foreign-bom: 

English 


2.6 


Oer»nan. ........ . .. ... .. 


10.4 


Hebrew 


8.5 


Irish 


29.1 


Italian 


37.4 






G ran d to tal .* 


100.0 


.5 


12.5 


1.7 


1.2 


16.0 






Native-bom of foreign father 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


.7 

.6 
.6 


8.6 
10.3 
15.8 


i1 

2.7 


1.0 

.8 

1.8 


11.2 


Total native-bom 


12 8 


Foreign-bom 


20.8 





Digitized by 



Google 



114 The Immigratioii Commission. 

Both the American white and negro groups of native parentage are 
exceeded in proportion of convictions of each of these crimes by 
some immigrant group. 

Only six of the twelve groups have any convictions of abduction. 
Of these the American-bom or ItaUan father has the largest propor- 
tion, 2.4 per cent. Th^ American-bom of German father stands 
second witJi 1.8 per cent, and the foreign-bom Irish third, with 1.2 
per cent. These are the only groups exceeding the native white 
group of native parentage in proportion, the latter group having 0.7 
per cent. 

The crime of assault is that offense of personal violence of which 
the greatest number of persons were convicted, 276 having be^i 
adjudged guilty of this crime. Three immigrant groups and two 
native groups of immigrant parentage have larger proportions of 
such convictions than the native white of native rather. The immi- 
grant groups are the Italian, 27.2 per cent; Irish, 25.6 per cent; Ger- 
man, 8 per cent. The second generation groups are the Italian, 12.2 
per cent; Irish, 11 per cent. 

The American negro group of native parentage also excecKls the 
American white of native parentage in percentage of convictions of 
assault, the former having 20.7 per cent and the latter 7.9 per cent. 
Thus, while three immigrant and two second generation CToups have 
larger proportions than the American white of native father, only 
two of these (the immigrant ItaUan and the immigrant Irish) exceed 
the American negro in proportion. 

But one group of offenders has no convictions of assault. This is 
the immigrant English, which is also without convictions of abduc- 
tion or rape, homicide being the only offense of personal violence 
found in its list of crimes. 

Convictions of homicide, like those of assault, are found in largest 
proportion in the immigrant ItaUan group. Of the total convictions 
of tnis group, 4.7 per cent were for homicide. Four of the five immi- 
grant groups and four of the five second generation groups have 
larger proportions of homicide convictions than the American white 
of native father. The immigrant groups are these: ItaUan, 4.7 per 
cent; English, 2.6 per cent; German, 2.4 per cent; Irish, 2.3 per cent. 
The second generation groups are these: English, 3.4 per cent; 
ItaUan, 1.2 per cent; Irisn, 1 per cent; German, 0.9 per cent. The 
proportion found in the American white group of native parentage 
is 0.5 per cent. As 2.8 per cent of the convictions of American 
negroes of native parentage are convictions of homicide, the only 
groups in whose criminaUty this offense plays a smaUer part than it 
does in that of the native white group of native parentage are the 
Hebrew immigrant and second generation groups. In the Hebrew 
immigrant group only 1 conviction of homicide is found, forming 
0.4 per cent of the total convictions for all crimes. In the Hebrew 
second generation group no convictions of homicide occur. This 
latter group is the only one in whose criminaUty homicide does not 
appear. 

While the native whites of native father are thus exceeded in pro- 
portion of homicide convictions by eight groups of foreign birth or 
parentage, the American negroes of native father are exceeded in 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



115 



proportion of such convictions only by the immigrant Italian group 
and the English second generation. 

The foreign-bom of the English, German, and Irish races have no 
convictions of the crime of rape. Of the remaining groups, each of 
which has one or more such convictions, the Irish second generation 
.and the American negro of native father are the only ones whose 
percentages of these convictions are less than the percentage found 
m the native white group of native parentage. Of the total convic- 
tions of the latter group tnose of rape form 0.7 per cent; the American 
n^ro percentage is 0.5, and the Irish second generation 0.3. The 
largest piroportion is found in the English second generation group, 
whose 2 convictions of rape form 6.9 per cent of its total number, 
Next iit rank is the proportion of the mimigrant ItaUan group, 5.1 
per cent. With these two exceptions rape does not form more than 
1.6 per cent of the total crime of any group, the latter percentage 
b^ng that of tJie immigrant Hebrews. 

OFFENSES AOAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

Of the crimes grouped under the caption of ''Offenses against 
public policy" but two divisions appear in numbers sufficiantly large 
to attract attention. These are !' gaming'' or crimes connected with 
gambling, and ''crimes against pubUc health and safety." The 
distribution of convictions of these offenses among the various 
nativity, parentage, and race groups is shown in the following table: 

Tablb 69. — Offenses againsi jmblicjoolicy compared wUh all offenses: New York court oj 
general sessions, October 1, 1908, to June SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 





An 

olbnses. 




Oenenl oftttTlty and raoab 


Qamlnf. 


Crtmes 
against 
pobUc 
health 

and 
safety. 


An 

other. 


TotaL 


Natf Te-bora of oatlye fithen 

White 


418 
218 

» 
113 

98 
800 

83 

88 
136 
247 

88 
235 


18 
3 


18 
8 

3 
3 
1 
8 
8 


4 
1 


37 


N«cn> 


11 


Knrlbih 


2 


Gfifnum 


11 




4 


Hebrew..... 




4 


Irish 


1 
3 

I 
2 
2 

1 


18 


Ttfillfttf 


g 


Forelgn-bom: 

^Iglfffh, ..„. 


2 


OermaD 


1 

8 

1 

29 


12 


Hebrew 


12 


Irish 


3 


ItAlfan..... 


40 








Grand total 


2,206 


65 


85 


21 


171 






Natl've4x>ni of fDrelsn father 


604 

1,326 

880 


17 
34 
81 


18 
44 

41 


6 
11 
10 


41 


Total oatiTe-bom. 


89 


Foireign«boni 


83 







Digitized by 



Google 



116 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 69. — Offenses against public poUof compared with all offenses: New York court of 
general sessions, October 1, 1908, to June 30, 1909— Continued. 

PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSEa 





An 

offenses. 


Offenses against public policy. 


Ocneral nativity and ra«e. 


GAming. 


Crimes 
against 
public 
health 
and 
safety. 


AU 
other. 


Total. 


Native-born of native father: 

White 


loao 

100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


3.6 

.9 

.0 
1.8 
8.1 

2.7 
3.7 

2.6 
7.2 
2.8 
1.2 

4.7 


4.8 
3.8 

6.9 
1.8 
1.0 
3.0 
8.7 

.0 

.8 

1.2 

1.2 

12.3 


/ 


8.9 


Negro ... . 




5.3 


Native-Dom of foreign father, by race of father: 

English 




6.9 


German . 




a.6 


Hebrew... 




4.2 


Irish 




&0 


Italian 




9.8 


Foreign-bom: 

English 




5.1 


Qerman 




a6 


Hebrew 




4.9 


Irish 




3.5 


Italian 




17-0 








Grand total 


100.0 


2.9 


3.9 




7-8 








Native-bom of foreign father 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


2.4 
2.6 
3.5 


2jr 

3.3 

4-7 




5.9 


Total native-bora 




a7 


ForeJgn-bora 




• 9.3 









Each of these forms a larger proportion of the total crimes of 
some immigrant group than of those of American whites of native 
parentage. 

Gaming includes the offenses of gambling and of possessing policy 
slips. The immigrant German and ItaUan races nave larger pro- 
portions of convictions of these crimes than the native whites of native 
father, the German percentage beii^ 7.2, the ItaUan 4.7, and the 
native white of native father 3.6. The largest proportion found in 
the immigrant groups is that of the Germans (7.2 per cent); the 
largest appearing in the second-generation grou^ is that of the 
American-bom children of ItaUans (3.7 per cent). With the exception 
of the Italian, all second-generation groups have smaller proportions 
of gaming than the white American group of nonimmigrant parentage, 
Oruy one group has no convictions of gaming — ^the English second 
generation. Of the remaining groups, all exceed the native negro of 
native father in percentage of such convictions. 

Crimes against pubUc health and safety include such offenses as 
the imlawful carrying of weapons and the unlawful sale of cocaine. 
They form a larger proportion of the total offenses of the immigrant 
Itahan and of the Enghsh second-generation groups than of those of 
the native white group of native parentage. Of tne crimes of immi- 
grant ItaUans, 12.3 per cent are of this character; of those of Amer- 
ican-bom persons or English parentage, 6.9 per cent; and of those 
of native whites of native fatner, 4.3 per cent. The native negro 

froup of native parentage is exceeded in .proportion of these crimes 
y tne three groups just enumerated, its proportion being 3.8 per 
cent. One group — the foreign-bom English — nas no convictions of 
crimes against pubUc health and safety. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigratioa and Crime. 



117 



SUMMABY. 



In the following table if^ shown a summary of the relations' of the 
various groups of offenders to the gainful offenses: 

Tab LB 70. — Relative frequency of gainful offenses: New York court of general sessions^ 
October 1, 1908, to June SO, 1909. 



General natlTity and 
nee. 


AUgahiftil 
offenses. 


Burglary. 


Extortion. 


F„^.„d 


Larceny and 

receiving 
stolen prop- 
erty. 


Robbery. 




Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent 


NatiTe-bom of native 
father: 

v\'hlte 


6 
10 


2 

1 
7 

4 
8 
3 
11 
12 


79.7 

7ao 

79.3 
85.7 
89.6 
78.0 
72.0 

84.6 
76.2 
85.0 
60.6 
43.8 


9 

4 

8 
6 

6 
3 

1 

12 

7 

2 

11 

10 


20.3 
25.4 

20.7 
24.1 
22 9 
2G.0 
39.0 

7.7 
21.6 
26.7 

9.3 
U 9 


3 
2* 

i' 


0.2 
.0 

.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 
.4 
.0 
4.3 


4 
9 

6 

6 

1 

10 

7 
2 
3 

8* 


5.3 
1.4 

3.4 
3.6 
8.3 
1.3 
.0 

2.6 
8.0 
6.1 
.0 
1.7 


6 
10 

11 

6 
8 
12 


51.4 
40.8 

55l2 
68.0 
57.3 
49.7 
31.7 

74.4 
4&6 
51.0 
47.7 
23.8 


2 
3 

6* 


5 

7* 

1 

4 


2.4 


Negro 


2.3 


Native^m of for- 
eign father, by lace 
of father: 

English 


.0 


o^nnan 


.0 


Hebrew 


1.0 


Irish 


1 


Italian 


1 2 


Foreiipi-bora: 

Eni5lish 





Oi«rnian 


.0 


Hebrew 


g 


Irish 


3 5 


Italian 


2.1 







American-bom offenders of native father are exceeded in percentage 
of each of the gainful offenses by one or more race groups of immi- 
grant offenders. Moreover, each of the five groups or -Aonerican- 
bom offenders of immigrant parentage exceeds the native-bom of 
native father in percentage of convictions of burglary, one of them in 
percentage of convictions of forgery and fraud, and three in per- 
centage of convictions of larceny and receiving stolen goods. 

Eacn of the offenses of personal violence, Uke those of gain, caused 
a larger proportion of the convictions of some immigrant group of 
offenders than of the native-bom of native father. (See Table 71.) 
Each of these offenses also occurred with greater relative frequency 
among the offenses of American-bom persons of immigrant parentage 
than among the offenses of the native-bom of native father. Of the 
several groups of offenders shown in the table the immigrant ItaUan is 
strikingly differentiated from the others by the prominence of assault 
and homicide among its crimes, having larger percentages of con- 
victions of these offenaes than any other group of oJenders. 



Digitized by 



Google 



118 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 71. — Relative frequency of offenses of personal violence: New York court of gen- 
eral sessions, October 1, 1908, to June SO, 1909. 



General natiTtty and noe. 


Ail offenses 

of 

personal 

▼Meooe. 


Abduction 
and kid- 
naping. 


Assault 


Homicide. 


R^»e. 


• 


Rank. 


Per 

oent 


Rank. 


Per 
cent 


Rank. 


Per 
oent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Par 
cent. 


Nattre-bora of native fother: 

White 


8 
3 

5 
9 
11 
6 

4 

13 

7 
10 
2 

1 


9.8 
23.9 

13.8 
8.9 
5.2 
12.3 
17.1 

2.6 
10.4 

a5 

20.1 
37.4 


4 
2' 

i* 

s" 

3 

6 


a7 
.0 

.0 
1.8 
.0 
.0 
Z4 

.0 
.0 
.4 

1.2 

.4 


7 
3 

11 
9 

10 
5 

4 

6" 

8 
2 
1 


7.9 
2a7 

S.4 

5.4 
4.2 
11.0 
12L2 

.0 
8.0 
6.1 
2&6 
27.2 


10 
8 

2 
9 

8* 

7 

4 
6 
11 
6 

1 


0.5 

2.8 

8.4 
.9 
.0 
1.0 
1.2 

2.6 

2L4 

.4 

13 

4.7 


7 
8 

1 
6 
5 
9 

4 

3' 

2* 


a7 


Negro 


.5 


Natiye^m of foreign father, by 
noe of father: 

Rngifqh 


6.9 


Oerinan 


9 


Hebrew 


1.0 


Irish 


.3 


Italian 


1.2 


Foreign-bom: 

English 


.0 


Oennan 


.0 


Hebrew 


1.6 


Irish 


.0 


Italian 


5tl 







Of the offenses against public policy, gaming and crimes against 
public health and sc^ety are the only ones of wmch a sufficient num- 
oer of persons were convicted to make tJie presentation of their dis- 
tribution among the crimes of the seyeral nativity and race groups of 
value. 

Table 72. — Relative frequency of offenses against puJblic policy: New York court ofgm* 
eral sessions, October 1, 1908, to June 30, 1909, 



General nativity and race. 


AUoflenses against 
pablio policy. 


Gaming. 


Crimes agahistpab- 
lic health and 
safety. 




Rank. 


Percent 


Rank. 


Percent 


Rank. 


Percent. 


Native-bom of native foth^r 

White 


4 
7 

5 
11 
10 
6 
2 

8 

3 
9 

12 

1 


8.9 
5.2 

6.9 
3.6 
4.2 
6.0 

9.8 

Al 
9.6 
4.9 
3,6 
17.0 


4 
11 


8.6 
.9 

.0 
1.8 
8.1 
2.7 
8.7 

2.6 
7.2 
2.8 
1.2 

4.7 


3 

4 

2 

7 
9 
6 
5 


4.S 


Neno 


3.8 


Native-bom of foreign father, by race of 
father: 

Fngllsh , _.. 


6.9 


OflT!«an a. x..^^ 


9 

5 
7 
3 

8 
1 
6 
10 
2 


1.8 


Hebrew 


1.0 


Irish 


3-0 


Italian 


3.7 


Foieign-bom: 

English 


.0 


Q^$rman r , 


10 
8 
8 

1 


.8 


Hebrew 


1-2 


Irish 


1.2 


Italian 


12.3 







Gaming forms a larger percentage of the offenses of two immigrant 
groups and one second-generation group than of the offenses o? the 
American bom of native parentage. Crimes against public health 
and safety form a larger percentage of the offenses of one inunigrant 
and one second-generation group than of the offenses of tiiie native- 
bom of native parentage. Of tne groups of offenders shown in the 
table, the inunigrant Italian is unique in that it exceeds the American 
group of native parentage in percentage of convictions of both 
gammg and crimes against public health and safety. Its position is 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



119 



further striking in that in percentage of convictions of crimes against 
public health and safety it exceeds all other groups of offenders, and in 
percentage of convictions of gaming it is exceeded by only one group of 
offenders. 

3. County and Supreme Coubts op the State op New York. 

The preceding seta of data have been concerned with the crimi- 
nality of New York Gty alone. In order at least roughly to survey 
crime in the entire State, the records of the various coimty and 
supreme courts of the State have been employed. From them sta- 
tistics of crime during the'two calendar years of 1907 and 1908 have 
been compiled. 

The total number of convictions for all crimes during this two- 
year period is 12,897. Excluding 1,255 cases in which the offense 
was insufficiently defined to admit of classification, and 3 in which a 
corporation was the offender, these convictions have been classified 
as follows: 



Offenses. 



Convio- 
tions. 



Per cent of 
total con- 
Ylctions. 



Qtlnftil 

Offrinww of personal violence. . 

Offenses against pablic policy 

Offenses against chastity 

UnclasBifled offenses 

Total 



8,282 

1,787 

1,154 

223 

243 



7a7 
15.4 
9.9 
1.9 
2.1 



11,639 



loao 



The records of the county and supreme courts do not show the 
races of offenders, but only the countries of their birth. Therefore 
the analysis must be of nationaUty (or country of birth) groups. 
Because of the small number of convicted persons belonging to some 
of these nationality groups, a further elimmation may well be made, 
and the actual aniuysis confined to those nationalities represented by 
fifty or more cases each. These nationaUties are nine in number: 
American, Austro-Hungarian, Canadian, EngUsh, German, Irish, 
Italian, Polish, and Russian. 

The total number of convictions for definitely known offenses is 
shown by covmtry of birth in Table 73. 

Table 73. — Convictions in New York county and tujpreme courts^ Jixnuary i, 1907 ^ to 
December SI, 1908 ^ by country ofhvrth of offender. 



Country of birth. 


Convfcy 
tlons. 


United states 


7,288 
3,879 

419 


Foreign ooantrles 


Amtrla-Hffnirarv 


Oaoada 


124 


letifT^ivl 


161 


Ocrmany 


514 


Iwtond.'. 


278 


Italy 


1,183 
96 


Poland 


R^mria 


646 


Other ooantrles - 


468 




r 


474 








Total 


11,639 





Digitized by 



Google 



120 



The ImmigradoD Commtsaioa. 



To compare these nationalities on the basis of total convictions is 
evidently impossible, inasmuch as their representation in the popula- 
tion of the State is not known. All that can be done, therefore, is to 
observe the forms which the criminaUty of these convicted persons 
has taken, by comparing the relative frequency of the commission of 
the various ofiFenses and classes of offenses among them. In this 
comparison the 474 cases in which the nativity of the offenders was 
not reported must be excluded from the figures. This reduces the 
number oi convictions shown in the text tables to 11,165. 

CLASSES OF cnncE. 

In the following table these convictions have been grouped by 
class of crime and nativity of offenders: 

Table 74. — DistnbtUian o/da$$e$ of crime: New York countff tmd iupreme couiUy 1907 

and 1908, 

NUMBER. 



Country of birth. 


Total. 


Oatnftil 
offenses. 


Offenses 
of per- 
sonal 

Tlolenoe. 


Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
chasUty. 


Unclas- 
sified 
offenses. 


United States 


7.286 


5,666 


855 


500 


135 


122 








419 
124 
161 
514 
278 
1,183 
96 
646 


280 
85 

115 
300 
197 
445 
63 
498 


78 
16 
13 
67 
46 
465 
17 
84 


31 
14 
17 
54 
24 
244 
11 
35 


10 
1 

11 

13 
3 

13 
2 

12 


20 


Cann^ft ". .' 




Rn^l^Mid r , 




Germany 


20 


IrPlAnd , , 




Italy 


16 


Poland 




H^iffffia , 


17 






Total foreljm 


3.879 


2,345 


873 


485 


72 


104 








Grand total 


11,165 


8,010 


1,728 


994 207 


226 











PER CENT OF TOTAL NUMBER. 



United States | loao 

Austria-Hungary 100.0 

Canada 100.0 

England 100.0 

Germany 100.0 

Ireland 100.0 

Italy 100.0 

Poland 100.0 

Russia 100. 



Total foreign . 
Grand total . . 



100.0 



77.8 



66.8 
68.5 
71.4 
70.0 
70.9 
37.6 
65.6 
77.1 



60.5 

tTt" 



11.7 



18.6 
12.9 
8.1 
13.0 
16.5 
39.3 
17.7 
13.0 



22.6 
15.5 



7.0 



7.4 
11.3 
10.6 
10.5 

8.6 
20.6 
11.6 

5.4 



12.5 
IT 



1.9 



2.4 

.8 
6.8 
2.5 
1.1 
1.1 
2.1 
1.9 



1.9 



The gainful offenses are those for which the largest number of con- 
victions is found, such convictions comprising nearly three-fourths 
of the total number. This table shows that the gainful offenses occur 
with greatest relative frequency among the crimes of the native-bom. 
Yet the difference between their percentage of American and of Rus- 
sian crimes is slight — only seven-tenths of one per cent — their per- 
centage of the former being 77.8 and of the latter 77.1. In each nation- 
aUty group except the Italian the gainful offenses compose over six- 
tenths of all crimes. Of the total offenses of the Italians, however, 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



121 



they form only 37.6 per cent, a proportion so much less than that 
found in any other nationaUty group as strikingly to differentiate 
Italian crimmaUty with respect Uy the gainful offenses. 

It is notable that of the lour nationaUties haying the largest per- 
centages of these crimes, three a^e Englishnspeaking — ^the -American, 
English, and Irish. It is also noteworthy that this is the only class 
of crime which forms a larger proportion of the total offenses of the 
American bom than of those of any inmiigrant group. 

Of the eight immigrant nationalities represented m the foregoing 
table seven nave higher percentages of convictions of the oflfenses 

RdcUive frequency of gainful offenses: New York county and supreme courts, 1907 and 1908. 



COUNTRY or BIRTH 


20 


40 


60 


80 


UNITCD STATES 

fttJSSIA 

CN6LAN0 

IRELANO 

GERMANY 

CANADA 

AUSTRIA-HUNGAWl' 

POLAND 

ITALY 






^^^^^^ 


^^H 




■ 


1 


1 






HHHI 


[■III 




I 


1 


1 






w^^^ 


^MM 




r-p 


' 1 




i^HH 


IBH 




1 


rn— 1 




HHlH 


(■H 




' ' 1 ' ' 


1 




IHHH 


HHi 




' j ' 


p-j 




BHMI 


jHJH 




1 


\ 




BHHJII 


(■mi 




T 








bbmb 


■ 


f 





of personal violence than the noninunigrant group. These seven 
immigrant groups are, in the order of then* percentages, those from — 

Poroent. 

Italy 39.3 

Austria-Hungary 18. 6 

Poland 17.7 

Ireland 16. 5 

Germany 13. 

Russia 13.0 

Canada 12.9 

The percentage of nonimmigrant group (persons bom in the United 
States) is 11.7, or considerably less than one-third that of the ItaUan 
group. The only group of foreign-bom persona having a smaller 
percentage of convictions for offenses of personal violence than the 
native-bom is that coming from England, whose percentage is only 
8.1, or only a little more than one-mth tnat of tne Italian group of 

79340'*— VOL 3^—11 ^9 



Digitized by 



Google 



122 



The Inunigration Commission. 



immigraiit offenders. The most striking thing shown by the figures 
is the high percentage which these offenses form of Italian cnmes. 
It is not only more than three times the percentage which they form 
of American crimes, but is more than twice the Austro-Hungarian 
percentage, which is higher than that of any group except the Italian, 
and neany five times the English percentage. While convictions 
of these offenses comprise less than one-fifth of the total convictions 
of every other nationality, they compose almost two-fifths of the 
whole number of Italian convictions, a difference as remarkable as 
that appearing in the figures of the gainful offenses, which are as 
strikingly less conunon among Italian crimes than among those of 
all other nationalities, as the offenses of personal violence are more 
common. 

HekUive freqiiency of offenses of personal violence: New York county and supreme courts^ 

1907 and 1908, 




Offenses against public policy, as well as those of personal violence, 
occur in largest proportion"^ among Italian crimes, forming 20.6 per 
cent of the total number. This proportion is nearly twice that of 
the Poles, whose percentage is second in rank, being 11.5. Offenses 
against public policy, like those of personal violence, form a larger 
proportion of the cnmes of every immigrant group except one than 
of the crimes of the native-bom. In the case of offenses ajgainst 
personal violence, the exception is the English group; in that of 
offenses against public policy it is the Russian. 

Four immigrant groups exceed the native-born in percentage of 
offenses against chastity — the English, German, Austro-Hungarian, 
and Polish. Of the several percentages, the English is much the 
greater, being 6.8, while the second in rank (the German) is only 2.5, 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



123 



The Russian and American groups have Uke proportions of these 
offenses, 1.9 per cent. The Canadian, Irish, ana Italian percentages 
are less than the American, the Canadian, which is 0.8, being tne 
smallest percentage found among the nine nationality groups shown 
in the table. 

An analysis of some of the specific offenses composing these crime 
CToups may well be made. Only the first three classes of crime are 
found in sufficient numbers in these records to make an analysis of 
specific offenses feasible; offenses against chastity are too few in 
number to render such analysis of them valuable. 

GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

The several offenses designated as "gainful" are shown in the 
following table, together with the proportion each forms of the total 
crimes of each nationaUty: 

Table 76. — Oain/ul offenses compared toith all offenses: New York county and supreme 

courts, 1907 and 1908, 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Gainful offenses. 


V Country of birth. 


Burglary. 


Kxtor- 
Uon. 


Forgery 

and 

fraud. 


Larcany 

and 
receiving 

stolen 
property. 


Robbery. 


Total. 


United States 


7,286 


2.181 


16 


221 


8,009 


238 


6,666 






Anftria-HungAry 


419 
124 
161 
5U 
278 
1,183 
96 
646 


72 
24 
30 

133 
60 

125 
27 

156 


2 


17 
17 


191 
52 
78 
202 
128 
238 
31 
813 


6 
4 
2 
7 
3 

80 
4 

11 


280 


Cuiadn 


86 


Kn^lftnti, r T ^ „ ^ ^ , , - 




116 


Oflfinany 


1 
3 
86 


360 


Irelaod/. 


197 


Italy 


445 


Poland 


63 


Hi»!fi» 


1 


496 






Total foreign 


3,879 


n8 


63 


76 


1,414 


84 


2,346 






Grand total 


11,165 


2,899 


60 


297 


4,423 


822 


8,010 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



United States 


100.0 


29.9 


0.22 


3.03 


41.3 


3.3 


77.8 






A ngtrfauHnmrnrv 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


17.2 
19.4 
18.6 
25.9 
21.6 
10.6 
28.1 
24.1 


.48 
.00 
.00 
.19 
1.08 
3.05 
.00 
.15 


2.15 
4.03 
3.U 
3.31 
1.08 
.59 
1.04 
2.63 


45.6 
41.9 
48.4 
39.3 
46.0 
20.1 
32.3 
48.5 


1.4 
3.2 
1.2 
1.4 
1.1 
8.3 
4.2 
1.7 


66.8 


Canada 


68.5 


Engl ATid „,.,,, ,, ^ 


71.4 


Gennftny 


70.0 


Ireland/. 


70.9 


Italy 


37.6 


Poland 


65.6 


Russia 


77.1 






Total foreign 


100.0 


18.5 


1.4 


1.96 
2.7 


36.6 
39.6 


2.2 


60.5 






Grand total 


100.0 


26.0 


.62 


2.9 


71.7 







Burglary is the only gainful offense which forms a larger propor- 
tion of the crimes of the native bom than of those of any loreign- 
bom group. Of the 7,286 persons bom in the United States convicted 
of alf crimes, 2,181, or 29.9 per cent, were convicted of bui^lary. 
Of the several immigrant groups the Polish has the largest propor- 



Digitized by 



Google 



124 



The Immigration Commission. 



tion of this crime, or 28.1 per cent, while the Italian has the smallest, 
or 10.6 per cent. 

Extortion forms less than one-half of 1 per cent of the crimes of 
all the nationaUties except the Irish and Italian. The largest pro- 

{ortion is that of the Italian group, which is 3.05 per cent. The 
rish proportion, which is second in rank, is only slightly more than 
one-third as great as this, being 1.08 per cent. Three of the immi- 
grant groups — the Italian, Irish, and Austro-Hungarian — ^have larger 
proportions of extortion than the American-bom, whose percentage 
IS 0.22. This is less than half the Austro-Hungarian percenta^ 
(0.48), slightiy more than one-fifth the Irish (1^08), and approxi- 
mately one-fourteenth the Italian (3.05). Three nationalities — the 
Canaoian, English, and Polish — have no cases of extortion recorded 
against them, while the German and Scotch group have only one 
case each. 

BekUiveJrequenq/ of burglary: New York county and tupreme courU^ 1907 and 1908. 



COUNTBY or BIRTH 




40 



60 



80 



NATIVE 
FOREIGN 

POLAND 

GERMANY 

RUSSIA 

IRELi^NQ 

CANi^OA 

ENGLAND 

AJJSTOlA-HUNGARir 

l1?a.Y 



Among the convicted persons of three nationalities forgery and 
fraud form larger proportions of the total crimes than among those 
of American birth. These three nationaUties are, in the order of 
the greatest relative frequency of these offenses among them. 
Canadian, German and EngUsh. Of Canadian crimes forgerv and 
fraud form 4.03 per cent, of German, 3.31, of English, 3.11, while of 
the offenses of Americans they compose 3.03 per cent. Least of all 
is the proportion of forgery and fraud among tne ItaUans, whose per- 
centage of these offenses is 0.59, or approximately one-seventh uiat 
of the Canadians, and less than one-fif tn that of the Germans, English, 
and Americans. 

From the preceding table it appears that a greater number of con- 
victions were for larceny and receiving stolen property than for any 
other crime. Only three groups of foreign-bom persons have 
smaller percentages of these offenses than the native-bom. Five of 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 125 

the eight immigrant groups appearing in the table have larger 
proportions of convictions lor larceny and receiving stolen property 
than the American. These five groups are those from Russia, Eng- 
land, Ireland, Austria-Hungary, and Canada. Of the total con- 
victions of only three nationauties — the Canadian, Polish, and It^an — 
do those for larceny and receiving stolen property form less than 40 
per cent, and these three nationalities are the only ones having 
smaller percentages of these crimes than the American. 

Larceny and receiving stolen property are most common among 
the crimes of Russians, of which they form 48.5 per cent. They are, 
however, almost as conunon among the crimes of ,peraons of English 
birth, composing 48.4 per cent. The unknown racial composition 
of the Russian group of convicts renders it impossible properly to 
compare it with any of the others. It is not likely, however, that 
many persons of the true Russian race are included in it, and the 
presence of a distinct group of persons coming from Poland suggests 
the improbabiUty of its contaimng many Poles. 

The relativelv small proportion of persons from Italy committing 
the offenses of larceny and receiving stolen property is notable, 
being only 20.1 per cent. It is only half that of persons bom in the 
United States, whose percentage of these crimes is 41.3, and con- 
siderably smaller than that of ftie group of persons having the next 
smallest proportion (the Germans), while tne proportion foimd in 
the Russian group, which exceeds all others, is nearly two and one- 
half times that of the Italians. 

The small number of persons of each nationaUty group convicted 
of robbery is striking. But one immigrant group ediibits a greater 
relative frequency of this crime than the Amencan. This is the Polish, 
whose percentage of convictions for robbery is 4.2, while that of tJbe 
American is 3.3. Of Italian crimes, however, robbery forms the 
same percentage as of American. With the exception of the Polish 
and Italian, all foreign-bom groups have smaUer percentages than 
the native-bom. The least proportion is found in the Irish group, 
only 1.1 per cent of its crimes consisting of robbery. The English 
percentage, however, is only slightly greater than this, being 1.2. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



126 



The Inunigration Commission. 



OFFBNSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

The several offenses of personal violence and their distribution 
among the various nationalities are shown in the following table: 

Table 76,— Offenses of personal violence compared with all offenses: New York cotmty 
and supreme courtSi 1907 and 1908, 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Offenses of personal violenoe. 


Country of birth. 


Abduc- 
tion and 
kidnap- 
ing. 


Assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


Total 


United States 


7,286 


37 


681 


72 


115 


856 






Austria-Honffary 


419 
124 
161 
514 
278 
1,183 
96 
646 


2 


68 
15 
8 
47 
38 
342 
14 
73 


7 


6 

1 
2 

11 
2 

25 
1 
3 


78 


Canada 


16 


Enirlfuid . , , . , 


1 
1 


2 

8 
6 
74 
2 
5 


13 


Germany.. 


67 


Ireland 


46 


Italy 


24 


465 


Poland 


17 


Russia 


3 


84 






Total fbreign 


3,879 


36 


664 


110 


63 


873 






Grand total 


11,165 


78 


1,295 


182 


178 


1,728 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



United States 


100.0 


0.5 


8.7 


1.0 


1.6 


1L7 






Austrif^Hunffarv 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


.47 
.00 
.62 
.19 
.00 
2.03 
.00 
.46 


15.0 
12.1 
5.0 
9.1 
13.7 
28.9 
14.6 
11.3 


1.7 
.0 
1.2 
1.6 
2.2 
6.3 
2.1 
.8 


L4 

.8 

L2 

2.1 

.7 

2.1 

LO 

.5 


18.6 


Canada .x*.. . .... 


12.9 


Eneland 


8.1 


Germany..... 


13.0 


Ireland.. 


1&5 


Italy 


39.3 


Poland 


17.7 


Rossia 


13.0 






Total foreign 


100.0 


.9 


17.1 


2.8 


L6 


22.5 






Grand total 


100.0 


.7 


11.6 


L6 


L6 


15.5 







None of these offenses of personal violence forms so large a propor- 
tion of the crimes of the native-bom as of those of some immigrant 
group. 

Abduction and kidnaping occupy a much larger place in the 
criminahty of the ItaUan group than in that of any other group of 
offenders. This is strikingly shown by the fact that while the 
ItaUans compose only a little more than one-tenth of the total num- 
ber of persons convicted of all crimes, 24 of the 73 cases of abduction 
and kidnaping, or approximately one-third, are ItaUan cases. Of 
Che total number of Italian convictions, these 24 of abduction and kid- 
naping form 2.03 per cent. Next in rank is the English proportion, 
which is 0.62 per cent. All other immigrant groups have smaller 
proportions than the American, 0.5 per cent of whose crimes consist 
of abduction and kidnaping. It is notable that three foreign nation- 
ahty groups — the Canadian, Irish, and Pohsh — have no convictions 
of abduction and kidnaping, while the English and German have 
only one each, the Austro-Hungarian two, and the Russian three. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



127 



* Of convictions for the specific offenses of personal violence, those 
for assault occur in largest numbers. Assault, like abduction and 
kidnaping, forms a larger proportion of the criminaUty of ItaUans than 
of that of any other nationality. The Italian proportion of assault, 
which is 28.9 per cent^ is nearly twice that of any or the other groups, 
the second in rank bemg that of the Austro-Himgarians, which is 15 

Ser cent. The Polish percentage is nearly as large as the Austro- 
[\mgarian, being 14.6. In addition to these three immigrant 
groups there are four others having larger proportions of assault 
than the native-bom, whose percentage is 8.7. Thus only one forei^ 
nationality has a smaller proportion than the American. This is 
the English, of whose total crimes assault forms 5 per cent. 
I Six of the eight inmiigrant CToups have larger proportions of homi- 
cide than the native-bom. Of these, the Kalian stands out most 
prominently, 6.3 per cent of its convictions being convictions of 

Edalive frequency ofawmU: New York county cmd tupreme courU, 1907 and 1908. 



COUNTRY or BIRTH 


20 ^0 60 60 1 


FORCIGN 
NATIVE 












ITALY 




AUSTRIA-HUNS(^RY 

POLAND 

IRELAND 

CANADA 

RUSaA 

GERMANY 

ENGLAND 







homicide. Next in rank is the Irish percentage, which is 2.2, or only 
slightly more than one-third the Italian. 

These six immigrant groups having larger proportions of homicide 
than the native-bom are, in the order of tneir percentages, those 
from — 

Per oent. 

Italy 6.3 

Ireland 2.2 

Poland 2.1 

Austria-Hungary *. 1.7 

Germany 1-6 

England 12 

Among American offenders convictions of homicide compose only 
1 per cent of all convictions. The only nationaUties of whose total 
cnndnality homicide forms a smaller j)art than of that of the 
American are the Russian and the Canadian. Of the 646 convictions 



Digitized by 



Google 



128 



The Immigration Commission. 



of all crimes of the Russians, only 5, or 0.8 per cent, were of homi- 
cide, while of the 124 convictions of Canadians not one was of this 
crime. 

Two of the groups of foreim-bom persons have larger proportions 
of convictions of rape than the native-bom, whose percentage is 1.6. 
These two nationalities are the German and ItaUan. Of the total crim- 
inality of each, rape forms 2.1 per cent. Two nationalities have each 
only 1 conviction of rape— the Canadian and the Polish — while the 
English and the Irish have but 2 convictions each. The smaU^t 
proportion, however, appears in the Russian group, of whose 646 
convictions of all crimes only 3, or less than one-half of 1 per cent, are 
of this crime. Although the German percentage equals the Italian, 
the fact that no nationalitv exceeds the latter in percentage adds 
something to the other evidence of the prevalence of crimes of per- 
sonal violence among the Italians. 

OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

Offenses of three kinds have been selected for analysis from those 
against pubUc poUcy. These are shown, with their proportions of 
the total crimes of each nationaUty, in the following table: 

Table 77.^)ffen9es against public policy compared tvith all offenses: New York county 
and supreme courts^ 1907 and 1908, 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Offenses against public policy. 


Country of birth. 


Crimes 
against 
public 
health 

and 
safety. 


Gaming. 


Violation 
of excise 
laws, etc. 


AH 
other. 


TotaL 


T7nited States 


7,286 


80 


127 


263 


39 


609 






Austria-Hungary 


419 
124 
161 
614 
278 
1,183 
96 
646 


15 
1 
3 

13 

3 

163 

5 

15 


2 


10 
13 
10 
27 
15 
68 
8 
9 


4 


31 


C^ada 


14 


England 


4 

11 
3 

12 
1 
4 




17 


Germany 


3 
3 
11 
2 

7 


54 


Ireland 


24 


Italy 


244 


Poland 


11 


Russia 


35 






Total foreign 


3.879 


229 


49 


168 


39 


486 






Grand total 


11,165 


309 


. ^^ 


431 


TB 


994 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



United States 


100.0 


1.1 


1.7 


3.6 




7.0 








Austria-Hungary 


100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 


3.6 
.8 
1.9 
2.5 
1.1 
13.8 
5.2 
2.3 


.5 
.0 
2.6 
2.1 
1.1 
1.0 
1.0 
1.6 


2.4 
10 5 
•6.2 
6.3 
6.4 
4.9 
3.1 
1.4 




7.4 


Canada 




11 3 


England 




10 6 


Germany... 




10.5 


Ireland.. 




8 6 


Italy 




20.6 


Poland 




11.5 






5.4 








Total foreign 


100 


6.9 


1.3 


4.3 




12.5 








Grand total 


100.0 


2.8 


1.6 


a9 




8l9 









Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 129 

Under crimes against public health and safety are grouped the. 
unlawful carrying of weapons, having narcotics with intent to 
administer, oDstructing health ofl&cer in discharge of his duties, 
willful violation of health laws, selling impure milk, and the unlawful 
sale of cocaine. While some of these offenses involve pecuniary dis- 
honesty (such as the sale of impure milk and the unlawful sale of 
cocaine) most of them are suggestive rather of crimes of violence. 
It is therefore notable, when comparison is made with the group of 
offenses of personal violence, that the Italians should have a larger 
proportion of convictions of these crimes against public health and 
safety than any other nationaUty, and that this proportion, which ia 
13.8 per cent of all Italian crimes, should be more than twice as 
great as that of any other nationality group and more than twelve 
times that of the Americans, whose percentage is only 1.1. Six of 
the eight immigrant groups exceed tne native-bom in relative fre- 

Juency of these crimes. These are the groups coming from Italy, 
oland, Austria-Hungary, Germany, and Russia. Omy the group 
from Canada has a smaller percentage than the native-bom, for that 
of the Irish immigrants is the same as the American percentage. 
Of the 124 Canadian convictions, only 1, or 0.8 per cent, is for a 
crime against public health and safety. 

Gaming, or gambling, forms a larger proportion of the crimes of 
English and German offenders than of those of offenders bom in the 
United States, the proportion of this crime in the English group 
being 2.5 per cent, in the German, 2.1 per cent, and in the American, 
1.7 per cent. Of the crimes of the Canadians none are of this char- 
acter, and of the total offenses of persons bom in Austria-Hungary, 
the number is onlv 2, or 0.5 per cent. The Poles have only one such 
conviction, but this forms 1 per cent of their total convictions, as 
do the 3 convictions of the Irish, while the 4 convictions of the Rus- 
sians constitute 0.6 per cent of the total number belonging to this 
group. 

The offenses grouped as violations of excise laws, etc., while of 
considerable variety, are chiefly offenses involving pecimiary dis- 
honesty. Convictions of these offenses form larger proportions of 
the total convictions of five immigrant groups than the v do of the 
total convictions of the native-born. These nve foreign-bom groups 
are those coming from Canada, England, Ireland, Germany, and Italy. 
The liurgest percentage of convictions of these offenses is f oimd in the 
Canadian group. Of all Canadian crimes these form 10.5 per cent, 
while of American they compose onlv 3.6 per cent. Even the percent- 
ile next in rank to the Canadian (that of the English) is only 6.2'per 
cent. The smallest percentage of all is that of the Russian group, of 
whose 646 convictions only 9, or 1.4 per cent, were for violations of the 
excise and similar laws. 

SUMMARY. 

Burglary is the only gainful offense which caused a larger percentage 
of the convictions of persons bom in the United States tnan of the 
convictions of persons bom in any foreign country. As is shown by 
the table following, extortion was the crime of a larger percentage of 
the Italian, Irish, and Austro-IIungarian offenders, forgery and fraud 
of the Canadian, German, and English, larceny and receiving stolen 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



130 



The Immigration Commission. 



property of the Russian, English, Irish. Anstro-Hungarian, and 
Canadian, and robbery of the rolish and Italian. 

Table 78. — Relative frequency of gainful offenses: New York county and supreme courts^ 

1907 and 1908. 



Country of birth. 


Percent 


Country ol birth. 


Per cent 


AUgaif^uloffentti. 
United States 


77.8 
77.1 
71.4 
70.9 
70.0 
68.5 
66.8 
65.6 
37.6 

29.9 
28.1 
25.9 
24.1 
21.6 
19.4 
18.6 
17.2 

ia6 

8.06 
1.08 
.48 
.22 
.19 
.15 
.00 
.00 
.00 


Forgery arid fraud. 
Canada 


4.03 


Bussia 




3.31 


Knrland ................ x ....*... ^ ... ^ 


Englan'f ...^ ...^ *,.... ... 


3.11 


Ireland 


United States 


3.03 


OfflTTlftDy. 


Russia 


2.63 


Canada 


Austria-Hungary 


2.15 


Anstria-Hungary 


Ireland 


1.06 


Poland. 


Poland 


1.04 


Italy 


Italy 


.59 


Burglary. 
United states 


Lmteny and receiving stolen property. 
Russia 


48.S 


Poland 


England 


48.4 


Ofrmany 


Ireland 


46.0 


Bussia ! 


Austria-Hungary 


45.6 


Ireland 


Canada T..! 


4L9 




United States 


41. 3 


England 


Qermany 


39.3 


Austria-Huneary 


Poland 


32.3 


SSy 


Italy 


20.1 


Extortion. 
Italy 


Robbery. 
Poland 


4.2 


Ireland. 


Italy 


3.3 


Austria*Hungary 


United States 


3.3 


United states 


Oann^A 


3.2 


Germany. . 


Russia , 


1.7 


Russia. I 


Austrift-Hnngnry. ..!.................... 


1.4 


Canada. 


OenTiany....Txx'x x...... 


L4 


England 


England 


L2 


Poland 


irefind.... .;;;:;;:::;;;:;;;;.. :.::. 


LI 









Every offense of personal violence occurs with p*cater relative 
frequency among the crimes of some group of immigrant offenders 
than among the crimes of the American bom. As Table 79 shows, 
the Italians have the largest percentage of convictions of three of 
these offenses — abduction ana kidnaping, assault, and homicide — 
and share with the Germans the highest percentage of convictions of 
the fourth offense — i ape. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



131 



Table 79. — Relative frequency of offenses of personal violence: New York county and 
supreme courts^ 1907 and 1908. 



Country of birth. 



Peroeat 



Country of birth. 



Percent 



AU offtMa ofpemmal vMenc*. 

Italy 

Austria-Hungary 

Poland 

Ireland 

Germany 

Hussia '. 

Canada 

United States 

Bngland 

AliiMetUm QMd kidmapin§. 
Italj 

UnSed States!!!!!!;;!!;!!;!!!!.*!!! 

Austria-Hungary 

Russia 

Germany 

Canada 

Ireland... 

Poland 

AfMVll. 

Italy 

Austria-Hungary 

Poland 

Ireland 

Canada 



39.3 
1&6 
17.7 
1&5 

lao 

13.0 
12.9 
1L7 
8.1 



2.03 
.62 
.fiO 
.47 
.46 
.19 
.00 
.00 
.00 



28.9 
l&O 
14.6 

ia7 

12.1 



il Mait^— Continued. 

Russia 

Germany 

United States 

England 

Homicide. 

Italy 

Ireland 

Poland 

Austria-Himgary 

Germany 

Encjand 

United States , 

Russia , 

Canada , 

Rape. . 

Germany 

Italy 

United States 

Austria-Hungary 

England 

Poland 

Canada 

Ireland , 

Russia , 



11.3 
9.1 
8.7 
&0 



&3 
2.2 
2.1 
1.7 
1.6 
1.2 
LO 
.8 
.0 



2.1 
2.1 
1.6 
1.4 
1.2 
1.0 
.8 
.7 
.6 



Of each of the three kinds of offenses against public policy shown 
in the Table 80, some immigrant group of offenders nas a larger 
percentage of convictions than the native (or American) group. TVo 
of the nationaUties of foreign-bom offenders are especialTy prominent 
because of their lai^e percentage of convictions of certain offenses. 
These are the Italian and the Canadian, the former having a much 
larger percentage of convictions of crimes against the pubuc health 
and safety than any other nationaUty and the latter a much larger 
percentage of convictions of violations of excise and similar laws. 

Tabls 80. — Relative frequency of offenses against public policy: New York county and 
supreme courts, 1907 and 1908. 



Country of birth. 



AU offentes against ptMic poUep. 

Italy 

Poland 

Canada 

England 

Germany 

Inland 

Austria-Hungary 

United States 

Russia 

Crimes against the public health and safety. 

Italy 

Poland 

Austria-Hungary 

Germany 

Russia 

En^and 

United States 

Irdand 

Canada 



Percent 



2a6 
11.6 
11.3 

lae 
ia5 

8.6 
7.4 
7.0 
5.4 



13,8 
5.2 
3.6 
2.5 
2.3 
1.9 
1.1 
l.l 
.8 



Country of birth. 



Oaming. 

England 

Germany 

United States 

Ireland 

Italy 

Poland 

Russia 

Austria-Hungary 

Canada 

Violation of erase laws. etc. 

Canada 

England 

Ireland 

Germany 

Italy 

United States 

Poland 

Austria-Hungary 

Russia 



Percent 



2.6 
2.1 
1.7 
1.1 
1.0 
1.0 
.6 
.6 
.0 



ia5 

&2 
5.4 
&3 
4.9 
3.6 
3.1 
2.4 
1.4 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Chapteb IX. 

THE CITT OF CHICAGO. 

Police Arrests. 

Of the police reports obtained from the principal cities of the 
United States, only those of Chicago contained records of arrests 
admitting of the statistical analysis of the relations of immigrants to 
crime. No reports ^owed arrests by race and crime, and only those 
of Chicago correlated nationaUty and crime. The reports of the 
Chicago poUce department for the 10 years from 1897 to 1908 were 
obtained; but it was found that only those for the four years from 
1905 to 1908 contained tabular statements of arrests by crime and 
nationaUty. The records for these four years were therefore combined 
and retabulated. These figures form the material on which this 
chapter is based. 

It is fortunate that such statistics could be obtained from this 
city for, next to New York, Chicago had in 1900 the largest number 
of foreign-bom persons of any city in the United States, and of the 
six chief cities of the country Chicago ranked third in proportion of 
foreign-bom population, its 587,112 persons of foreign birtn forming 
34.6 per cent of its total population. 

During the four years under consideration the total numbw of 
arrests made by the Chicago police was 307,479. In 6,548 cases, 
however, the offense chai^M is so vaguely defined as to render its 
inclusion among anv of the definitely stated offenses impossible. 
These 6,548 arrests have therefore been elim'mated from the figures 
upon wruch analysis is based, leaving the total number of arrests 
considered 300,931. 

As in the preceding sections of this report, offenses have been 
divided into four groups of rather definite meaning. This leaves an 
unclassified remainder, which, because of the impossibiUtv of satis- 
factorily determining its criminal character, can not be analyzed. In 
the case of Chicago, this unclassified remainder amounts to but 1.6 
per cent of the total criminaUty. As in other cases, however, it has 
been retained in the total of offenses, upon which percentages of 
specific crimes and classes of crime are computed for the dinerent 
nationaUties. 

A summary of the various classes of crime appearing in the Chicago 
police reports during the four years under consideration is as follows: 



Offenses. 



Number 
of arrests. 



Percent 
of arrests. 



Oalnfal offenses 

Offenses of personal violence ... 
Offtaises against public policy . 

Offenses against chastity 

Unclassified offenses , 

Total 



39,390 
16,824 
226,164 
13.440 
5.107 



18.1 
5.6 

75.2 
4.5 
1.6 



300.931 



100.0 



133 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



134 



The Immigration Commission. 



Offenses against public policy form the major part of the case^ 
composing 75.2 per cent. Here is exhibited the effect of metropolitan 
conditions upon criminality — ^its chief form becomes the conmiission 
of acts frequently not in themselves of a serious criminal nature, but 
indicating rather a disregard for. or an igijorance of, the law. 

The records of the Chicago police do not show the races of arrested 
persons, nor is there any classification by countries of birth. The 
classification emplojed lies between these two, in that under the 
designation of ** nationality" there appears a division of persons bom 
in certain countries into groups which are evidently racial. Thus, 
there is a separation of Bohemians, of Folanders, and of Slavonians. 
The meaning of Bohemians is clear (persons born in Bohemia). 
Polanders are persons bom in Russian, (jerman, or Austrian Poland, 
and the term roUsh is therefore appUed in the following pages to this 
* 'nationality." By Slavonians are meant persons bom m the Hun- 
garian provinces of Croatia and Slavonia. In the discussion of the 
Chicago figures *'nationaUt3r" is therefore employed to indicate the 
geographical divisions in which the various groups of arrested persons 
were bom. 

Of the 23 nationality groups appearing in the reports, 3 have been 
omitted from the comparative analysis: Hollanders and Swiss, 
because of too slight representation m the total criminaUty, the 
former having but 469 arrests for specific offenses, and the latter but 
308, and the group desi^ated **Owier nationaUties," because of the 
impossibility of distinguishing its composition. The figures for theso 
groups have, however, been retained in the total figures for the 
foreign-bom. 

The American, or native-bom, group is divided into whites and 
negroes. A more accurate standard of comparison is thus secured 
than that appearing in the records of the New York City magistrates' 
courts oir in tnose of the county and supreme courts of New York State. 
In the treatment of the Chicago statistics the white American group 
is that with which the various immigrant groups are primarily com- 
pared. 

Among the nationaUty and color groups arrests for known offenses 
are distributed as follows: 

Table Sl.—DistribiUum of arreits, Chicago y 1905 to 1908, xndunvet by nationalUy of 

offender. 



Nationality. . 


Number 
of arrests. 


NationaUty 


Number 
ofarrests* 


Native-born: 

White 


171,120 
24,814 

3,897 
4,531 
2,126 
2,339 
1,137 
2329 
913 

19,347 
4,821 

10,743 
7,366 


ForelffQ-bom— Continued . 

Lithuanian 


2,582 


Negro . ...•••.... 


Norwegian 


2^401 


Foreign-bom; 

A iistrlan ., 


Polish 


19,57S 


Russian. 


9.240 


Bohemian. 


Scotch 


1.073 


C^n^ Ian 


Slavonian 


1,051 


Chinese 


Swedish 


5,44& 


Danish 


Other ibreign 


4,091 


English 


Grand total 




French 


300.931 


Of^nnan 


Total native-bom 




Greek 


195,934 


Irish 


Total foreign-born 


104,997 


Italian 











Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



135 



CLASSES OP OBIME. 

The several classes of crime are distributed among these national- 
ities as is shown in Table 82. 

Table S2, --Distribution of classes of crime: Chicago police arrests^ 1905 to 1908. 

NUMBER. 



NationaUty. 


Total. 


Galnftil 
offenses. 


Offenses 
of per- 
sonal 

Tiolence. 


Offenses 
against 
pubUc 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
chastity. 


UnoUasl- 

fledol^ 

fensea. 


Native-born: 

White ^ 


171,120 
24,814 

3,897 
4,631 
2,126 
2,339 
1,137 
2,329 
913 

19,347 
4,821 

10,743 
7,355 
2,582 
2,401 

19,576 
9,240 
1,073 
1,061 
5,446 


25,244 
3,830 

358 

451 

260 

44 

109 

249 

96 

2,145 

367 

603 

836 

279 

206 

2,097 

1,160 

71 

100 

407 


7,609 
1,695 

303 
370 
118 

38 

49 
116 

44 
1,277 
449 
606 
776 
313 
118 
1,831 
593 

63 
121 
234 


127,313 
17,215 

3,012 
3,497 
1,698 
2,153 

935 
1,839 

653 
14,903 
3,891 
9,201 
6,444 
1,881 
1,979 
14,931 
6,432 

914 

787 
4,664 


8,134 
1,878 

181 

95 

86 

102 

24 

76 

106 

659 

90 

147 

224 

66 

59 

420 

830 

19 

31 

140 


2,920 
296 


Negro 


Foreign-bom: 

Austrian 


43 


■Rohemlan. .... .... . . x * .^ ^x 


118 


Canadian . . . . ^ . ^ . . 


66 


Chtnww ...... 


2 




20 


English 


49 


'FT**nch... ......... XX a*4,* 


14 


German. 


463 


Greek 


24 


Irish 


187 


Italian 


76 


I4thnanian x x x . x 


64 


"Karyr^gUm x x . . . x . 


40 


poushT!^::::;::::::;::::::::;;:::::: 


296 


Russian. 


235 


Scotch 


16 




13 


Swfl<ll«h _, _, 


101 






Grand total 


300,931 


39,390 


16,824" 


226,164 


13,446 


6,107 




Total natiye-bom : 


195,934 
104,997 


29,074 
10,316 


9,104 
7,720 


144,528 
81,636 


10,012 
3,434 


3,216 


Total foreign-bom 


1,891 





PER CENT OF TOTAL NUMBER. 



Native-born: 

White 


100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


14.8 
. 16.4 

9.2 
10.0 
12.2 
1.9 
9.6 
10.7 
10.6 
11.1 
7.6 
6.6 
11.4 
10.8 
8.5 
10.7 
12.4 
6.6 
9.6 
7.5 


4.4 

6.4 

7.8 
8.2 
6.6 
1.6 
4.3 
6.0 
4.8 
6.6 
9.3 
6.6 
10.6 
12.1 
4.9 
9.4 
6.4 
4.9 
11.6 
4.3 


74.4 
69.4 

77.3 
77.2 
75.2 
92.0 
82.2 
79.0 
71.5 
77.0 
80.7 
85.6 
74.0 
72.9 
82.4 
76.3 
60.6 
85.2 
74.9 
83.8 


4.8 
7.6 

4.6 
2.1 
4.0 
4.4 
2.1 
3.3 
11.6 
2.9 
1.9 
1.4 
3.0 
2.1 
2.5 
2.1 
9.0 
1.8 
2.9 
2.6 








Fordgn-bom: 

Austrian 


* 


Bob^mni^m x ...... 




Canadian. . . 




Chinese 




Danish. 




ISngliiih 




French 




German 




Greek 




Irish 




Italian 




I4thuanian x x . . . x . . 




NnrwegiAn x x . 




Polish 




Kosi»kin X ... X X X XXX 




Scotch 




Slavonian 




Swedish 








Orand total 


100.0 


13.1 


6.6 


75.2 


4.5 






• 


Total nativp-bom ............x. 


100.0 
100.0 


14.8 
9.8 


4.0 
7.4 


73.8 
77.8 


5.1 
3.3 




Tot^l foreign-born 









From this table it appears that the gainful offenses are the only- 
ones which form a larger proportion of the crimes of white Americans 
than of those of any group of foreign-bom persons. The largest 
proportion of the gainful offenses, however, ia found in the grojup of 



Digitized by 



Google 



136 



The Immigration Commission. 



American negroes, of whose total crimes they form 15.4 per cent. 
Next in rank is their proportion of the crimes of American whites, 
which is 14.8 per cent. The percentage occurring in every immi- 
grant group is less than this, the greatest being foimd in the Russian 
group, which is 12.4. The Canadian percentage, however, is only 
3jghtly less than the Russian, being 12.2. Of the 20 groups of 
of^nders shown in this table the Chinese has the smallest proportion 
of the gainful oflFenses, or 1.9 per cent. 

The fibres showing arrests for offenses of personal violence bring 
out the fact that these offenses are relatively more frequent among 
arrested persons of all foreign nationalities except the Danish, 

lUUUivefrequmcy of gainful offenses: Chicago police arrests, 1906-1908. 



NAtlONAUTV 


S ID 15 






AMERICA NjNCGRO 




1 


AMERICAN^WHITC 






RUSSIAN 












CANADIAN 












ITALIAN 












GERMAN 






UTHUANIAN 






ENGLISH 
































GREEK [BBMWpBBI 




SWEDISH pBBBHpBBi 




SCOTCH pMMWpBi 


IRI9H pHHHpi 


CHINESE 1 


■i 







Swedish, and Chinese than they are among American white offenders. 
It is also shown by these figures that offenses of personal violwice 
are relatively most frequent among the crimes of immigrants coming 
from eastern and southern Europe — the Lithuanians, Slavonians, 
Italians^ Poles, Greeks, Bohemians, and Austrians. The largest 

{proportion is found in the Lithuanian group, of whose total crimes 
hose of personal violence form 12.1 per cent. Next in rank is the 
proportion occurring in the Slavonian group, 11.5 per cent, while 
the ItaUan percentage, which is 10.6, ran^ third. It is of interest io 
note the groups having larger proportions than the American whites. 
The descending order of percentage is shown on the page following. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



137 



Peroent 

Lithuanian 12. 1 

Slavonian 11. 5 

Italian 10.6 

Polish 9.4 

Greek 9.3 

Bohemian 8. 2 

Austrian 7.8 

German 6.6 



Peroent. 

American negro 6.4 

Russian 6. 4 

Canadian 5. 6 

Irish 5. 6 

English 5.0 

Scotch 4. 9 

Norwegian 4. 9 

French 4.8 



Rdalixe frequency of offemes ofper9onal violence: Chicago police arreate, 1905-1908. 



NATIONALITY S 10 IS 






jMHpMHpl 








€1 Avn^alAN ^^^HgH^ 




ITALl AN P" 






POUISH ^fl 








GREEK ^^^ 








BOHEMIAN N" 








AUSTRIAN F"' 






GERMAN HIH 






AMERI C AN^ NEGRO ^I^H 


■ 




RUSSIAN |HHi 


■ 

L 




CANADIAN r^^ 


\ 




IRISH jIHii 


1 




ENGLISH ^1 




SCOTCH 1— 




NORWEGIAN ^Wi 




FRENCH PIW 




AMERICAN, WHITE ^^M 




DANISH P— 




SWEDISH P" 




CHINESE pi 









Aside from the greater prevalence of crimes of personal violence 
among offenders of all but tliree of the foreign nationaUty groups than 
among the American white, the remarkably small proportion of 



79340**— VOL 36—11- 



-10 



Digitized by 



Google 



138 The Immigration Commission. 

these crimes among the Chinese is of chief interest. But 1.6 per cent 
of all Chinese arrests are for these crimes, while among the American 
whites they form 4.4 per cent, and among the Danes and Swedes 
4.3 per cent. 

Of the several classes of crime, offenses against public policy are 
the most common. More than three-fourths of all arrests made 
during the period under consideration were for such offenses. In a 
large city like Chicago offenses against public poUcy may indicate 
anything from ignorance to dangerous criminality. In general, 
however, these onenses are of minpr import and probably do not 
indicate any such criminal intent as the commission of the gainful 
offenses or most of the offenses of personal violence. They may 
spring from a disregard for the law, an attitude in itself dangerous to 
society, but in many cases they may be merely the result of thought- 
lessness or even ignorance. 

It might be anticipated that foreign peoples, coming from envi- 
ronments and acceptmg customs and rules of conduct frequently 
different from those of the people of the United States, would be more 
frequently offenders against **pubUc poUcy'^ than native-born per- 
sons — committers of acts frequently not in themselves of a criminal 
nature, but so because forbidden. 

The foregoing table shows this to be the case. With four excep- 
tions (French, ItaUan, Lithuanian, and Russian) the immigrant 
groups have larger proportions of offenses against public policv 
than the group of Ainerican whites, while no group has so small 
a proportion as the American negroes. The large proportion found 
in the Chinese group is especially noticeable, being 92 per cent. 
This is considerably greater than the proportion found in any 
other group, the next in rank being that of the Irish, which is 85.6 
per cent. Including the Chinese and Irish there are fourteen foreign 
nationalities which exceed in proportion of offenses against pubUc 
poUcy the American white group, 74.4 per cent of whose arrests were 
for such offenses. 

Offenses against chastity form a larger proportion of the crimes of 
only two of the immigrant groups than of the crimes of American 
white offenders. These two groups are the French and the Russian. 
Of the crimes of the former, offenses against chastity compose 11.6 
per cent and of the latter 9 per cent, wmle of the crimes of American 
whites they comprise 4.8 per cent. The American negro group has 
a larger proportion of such offenses, 7.6 per cent, than the American 
white. Of the twenty groups of offenders the Irish has the smallest 
proportion, only 1.4 per cent of its crimes being ** against chastity." 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



139 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

The distribution of arrests for the several gainful offenses among 
the various nationality groups is shown in the following table: 

Table 83. — Gainful offenses compared with all offenses: Chicago police arrests, 1905 

to 1908, 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Gainful offenses. 


Nationality. 


Burglary. 


Extor- 
tion. 


Forgery 

and 

firaud. 


Larceny 

and 
receiving 

stolen 
property. 


Robbery. 


Total. 


NaUve-bom: 

White 


171,120 
24,814 

3,897 
4,531 
2,126 
2,339 
1,137 
2,329 
913 

19,347 
4.821 

10.743 
7,356 
2,582 
2,401 

19,676 
9,240 
1,073 
1,051 
6,446 


5,038 
705 

40 
7b 
37 
2 
13 
30 
7 

338 
42 
55 
90 
23 
26 

284 
93 
12 
11 
27 


25 
1 


3,399 
206 

66 
47 
35 
3 
23 
35 
10 

313 
60 
74 

151 
37 
30 

138 

139 
6 
8 
72 


13,736 
2,643 

211 

271 

166 

37 

65 

158 

71 

1,342 

237 

395 

516 

181 

114 

1,391 

846 

45 

72 

271 


S,047 
376 

86 

. 67 

22 

2 

8 

26 

8 

150 

38 

78 

74 

38 

36 

283 

67 

8 

9 

87 


26,244 
3,830 


N^ro 


Foreign-borxL' 


368 


BohemlATi 




451 


Cunft/ltflTi ^ 




260 


ChiDese 




44 


nftnVih 




109 


English 




349 


French 




96 


O^^rman 


2 


2,146 
367 


Greek 


Irish 


i 

6 


603 


Tbdii^Ti 


836 


I/tt^iianian 


279 


tSin^mUin., 




205 


Poihh.,_ 


1 
6 


2,097 

1,160 

71 


RlUMlAf^ , . 


Sootdi ! 


Slavonian 




lOD 


flvudhh 




407 








Grand total.... 


300,931 


6,974 


41 


4,924 


23,029 


4,422 


39 ^0 






Tff tal natlvfr-hom ^ . , 


196,934 
104,997 


6,743 
1,231 


26 
15 


3,605 
1,319 


16,278 
6,751 


3,422 
1,000 


29,074 


Total forrtgn-bom . , 


10,316 





PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native-bom: 

White 


100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


2.9 
2.8 

L2 
1.7 
1.7 

.1 
1.1 
L3 

.8 
1.7 

.9 

.5 
1.2 

.9 
1.0 
1.5 
1.0 
1.1 
1.0 

.6 


0.015 
.004 

.000 
.000 
.000 
.000 
.000 
.000 
.000 
.010 
.000 
.009 
.008 
.000 
.000 
.005 
.054 
.000 
.000 
.000 


2.0 
.8 

1.7 
1.0 
1.6 

.1 
2.0 
1.5 
1.1 
1.6 
1.0 

.7 
2.1 
1.4 

':? 

1.5 

.6 

.8 

1.3 


8.0 
10.2 

6.4 
6.0 
7.8 
1.6 
5.7 
6.8 
7.8 
6.9 
4.9 
3.7 
7.0 
7.0 
4.7 
7.1 
9.2 
4.2 
6.9 
6.0 


1.8 
L6 

.9 

1.3 

1.0 

.1 

.7 

1.1 

.9 

.8 

.8 

.7 

' 1.0 

1.6 

1.6 

1.4 

.7 

.7 

.9 

.7 


14 8 


Negro 


16.4 
9 2 


Foreign-bom: 

Austrian 


Bohemian 


10 


Canadian 


12.2 
1 9 


Chinese 


Danish 


9 6 


English 


10 7 


French 


10.5 
11 1 




Greek 


7.6 
5.6 
11 4 


Irish 


Italian 


T.lthiiftTiffttl . X ..... . 


10 8 




8 5 


Polish 


10.7 


"Russian 


12.4 


Scotch 


6.6 
9.5 
7 6 


Slavonian 


Swedish 






Grand total 


100.0 


2.3 


.014 


1.6 


7.7 


1.4 


13 1 






Total nativ^bom , 


100.0 
100.0 


2.9 
1.2 


.013 
.014 


1.8 
1.3 


8.3 
0.4 


1.7 
1.0 


14.8 
9.8 


Total foreign-bom 





Digitized by 



Google 



140 The Immigration Ommiission. 

Burglary, while not comprising a lar^ part of the criminality of 
any nationality group, is oi importance oecause of its gravity; 6,974 
arrests were made for this crime in Chicago during the years from 
1905 to 1908. Of such arrests. 6,038 were of American whites, 
, forming 2.9 per cent of the total arrests of that group, or a larger 
pa*oportion than that found in any immigrant group. The propor- 
tion of such arrests is nearly as large in the American ncjgro group, 
being 2.8 per cent. The relatively large proportion which burglary 
forms of tne crimes of Bohemians (1.7 per cent) is also noticeable- 
ten groups of persons have larger percentages of the total gainful 
offenses, but tne American whites and ncCToes alone have larger 
proportions of burglary. It is true that the Bohemian percentage of 
burglary is the same as the Canadian and the German, but ooth 
of tnese latter nationaUties have higher percentages of the total 
gainful offenses and of the specific crunes of forgery and fraud, and 
of larceny and receiving stolen property. The Chinese have the 
smallest proportion of arrests for burglary of any of the groups 
shown in the table. Only two of their arrests, or 0.1 per cent^ were 
for this crime. This is only one-fifth the percentage foimd m the 
Irish and Swedish groups, which have, next to the Chinese, the 
smallest proportions of burglary, and only one twenty-ninth that of 
the American whites. 

For the crime of extortion only 41 arrests were made in Chicago 
during the four years from 1905 to 1908. Of these 41 arrests, 25 
were those of wmte Americans, forming 0.015 per cent of all white 
American arrests, 5 were arrests of Italians, forming 0.068 per cent 
of ItaUan arrests, while 5 were cases of Russians, composing 0.054 
per cent of Russian arrests. No other nationality has more than 2 
arrests (the German), while three groups of offenders (the American 
negro, the Irish, and the Polish) have only 1 each, and thirteen groups 
have no arrests for this crime. The largest proportion of arrests for 
extortion is therefore found in the ItaUan group, and the second in 
rank in the Russian group. These two nationaUties are the only 
ones whose percentages exceed that of the American whites. 

Forgery and fraud are the offenses for which 4,924 of the 300,931 
arrests of the four-year period under consideration were made. 
Although no group of foreign-born persons has a larger percentage 
of arrests for the total gainful offenses than the American whit^, 
one such group exceeds tnem in proportion of arrests for forgery and 
fraud. This is the ItaUan, whose proportion of forgery and fraud 
is 2.1 per cent, as compared with the American white proportion of 
2 per cent. It is also noteworthv that the Danes, who are exceeded 
in proportion of the total gainful offenses by 11 nationaUties, have a 
percentage of forgery and fraud equal to that of the white Ameri- 
cans, which is exceeded only by that of the Italians. Another strik- 
ing difference between the relations of various nationalities to the 
total gainful offenses and to the selected ones of forgery and fraud 
is shown in the proportion of the latter offenses among the Austrians. 
The Austrian percentage of the total gainful offenses is less than 
that of 13 other groups of persons; the Austrian percentage of forgery 
and fraud is exceedea only by that of the Italians, American whites, 
and Danes. The Chinese, who have the smallest group percentage 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



Immigraticm and Crime. 141 

of the total gainful offenses, likewise have the smallest proportion 
of the offenses of forgery and fraud, or 0.1 per cent. 

Turning to the crimes of larcency and receiving stolen property, 
which are here grouped together, another immigrant group is founa 
to have a larger proportion of arrests than the American white group. 
This is the Russian, whose proportion of arrests for larceny and receiv- 
ing stolen property is 9.2 per cent, as compared with the white 
American proportion of 8 per cent. Although the Russian percentage! 
exceeds that of the white Americans, it is not the greatest appearing 
in the above table. That of the American negro group exceeds it, 
being 10.2. All groups, however, except the Russian and the Ameri- 
can negro, have smaller proportions than the American whites. The 
smallest is that found in the Chinese group, 1.6 per cent of whose 
arrests were for larceny and receiving stolen property. This is less 
than half that of any other group, the Irish percentage, which most 
nearly approaches it, being 3.7. 

Robbery is the offense for which 4,422 arrests were made in Chicago 
during the four years under consideration. Of these 4,422 arrests, 
3,047 were arrests of American white offenders, while among no other 
nationality or color group of persons was the number of arrests for 
this crime more than 375 (the number of American negroes arrested). 
Of the total crimes of native-born white persons, robbery forms a 
larger proportion than of the crimes of any other group, its percentage 
of me offenses of American whites, which is 1.8, not only bemg greater 
than that of the offenses of any foreign-bom nationaUty, but greater 
than that of the crimes of the American negroes, which is 1 .5. Among 
two of the foreign-bom groups robbery forms as large a percentage 
of all crimes as it does among the American negroes. Theee two 
immigrant ^oups are the Lithuanian and the Norwegian. Of 
arrests of Chmese for the gainful offenses, only two were for robbery. 
Thus, as in the case of the total gainful offenses, and of the specific 
crimes of burglary, forgery, and fraud, larceny and receiving stolen 
property, and robbery, the Chinese perc^itase is less than that of any 
other group of persons, being in the case of robbery one-tenth of 1 

Eer cent, or only one-seventh that of the nationality (the Scotch) 
avin^ the next lowest percentage, and only one-eighteentli that of 
the white Americans* 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



142 



The Immigration Commission. 



OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

The distribution of arrests for the offenses of personal violence 
among the nationality and color groups is shown in Table 103. 

Table 84.— O/inuet of perianal violence compared with all offerua: Chicago police 

arreiU, 1905 to 1908. 

NUICBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Oflteises of personal violence. 


NationaUtf. 


Abduc- 
tion and 

kid- 
naping. 


Simple 
assault. 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape, 


Total. 


Native-born: 

White 


171, 1» 
24,814 

3,807 
4,531 
2,1M 
2,339 
1,137 
2,329 
913 

19,347 
4 821 

10,743 
7,866 
2,682 
2,401 

19,675 
9,240 
1,073 
1,051 
6,446 


76 
6 

8 


8,881 
460 

129 

212 

70 

13 

20 

60 

19 

097 

216 

843 

228 

144 

67 

868 

366 

29 

63 

146 


1,721 
566 

96 

99 

26 

9 

8 

27 

14 

804 

117 

139 

267 

114 

84 

697 

142 

12 

49 

47 


1,816 
600 

61 
46 
13 
12 
13 
19 
8 

206 
76 
96 

381 
60 
19 

288 
60 
9 
18 
26 


616 
84 

14 
18 
8 

4 
2 
8 
3 
68 
81 
28 
46 
4 
8 
78 
31 
8 
1 
13 


7,601 


Negro 


1,506 
3QS 


Foreign-bom: 

Austrian 


Bohemian 


370 


Canadian 


1 


118 


CbiTM^ 


38 


T>ftnUh ..... 




49 


Fffgll^h 


2 


116 


French 


44 


Qtfman 


7 
10 


1,277 
4# 


Oreek 


Irish 


005 


TtftfHF^ 


14 
1 


776 


Lithuanian 


818 


Norwegian 


118 


Poli<ihr 


6 

6 


1,831 
608 


Russian 


Sootoh 


Sg 


Slavonian 




121 


8w«diffh 


2 


234 






Grand total 


800,931 


136 


8,148 


4,464 


8,106 


968 


16,821 




Total native-bom 


196,934 
104,997 


82 
64 


4,331 
3,817 


2,276 
2;i88 


1,816 
1,208 


600 
868 


0,104 
7,73B 


Total foieign-bo™ 





PER CBNT OP ALL OFFENSES. 



Katlve4>om: 

White 


loao 
loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 


a044 
.024 

.077 
.000 
.047 
.000 
.000 
.066 
.000 
.036 
.207 
.000 
.190 
.039 
.000 
.026 
.054 
.000 
.000 
.037 


2.3 
1.8 

3.8 
4.7 
8.3 
.6 
2.3 
2.6 
2.1 
3.6 
4.6 
3.2 
3.1 
6.6 
2.4 
4.4 
4.0 
2.7 
6.0 
2.7 


1.0 
2.2 

2.5 
2.2 
1.2 
.4 
.7 
1.2 
1.6 
1.6 
2.4 
1.3 
3.6 
4.4 
1.4 
3.0 
1.6 
1.1 
4.7 
.9 


a8 

10 

1.6 

1.0 

.6 

.6 

1.1 

.8 

.9 

1.1 

1.6 

.9 

3.1 

1.9 

.8 

1.6 

.6 

.8 

L7 

.6 


aso 

.34 

.36 

.29 

.38 

.17 

.18 

.84 

.829 

.826 

.64 

.26 

.68 

.16 

.38 

.40 

.84 

.28 

.10 

.24 


4.4 


Negro 


6.4 


Foreign-bom: 

Austrian 


7 8 


Bohei^ian 


&2 


Canadian 


5.6 


Chinese 


1.6 


Danish 


4.8 


English 


5uO 


French x ^ . * * ^ ^ 


4.8 




6.6 


Oieek 


9.3 


Irish 


5.6 


Tti^lifin 


10.6 


I/ithuanian 


12.1 


Norwegian , 


4.9 


Polish 


9 4 


Russian.......... 


6.4 


Scotch 


4.9 


Slavonian 


11.6 


Swedish 


4.3 






Grand total 


100.0 


.046 


2.7 


1.6 


1.0 


.82 


5.6 






Total native-born 


loao 
loao 


.042 
.061 


2.2 
8.6 


1.2 
2.1 


.9 
L2 


.31 
.36 


4.6 


Total foreign-bom 


7.4 







Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 143 

Arrests for each of these offenses form a lai^er proportion of the 
total arrests of several of the immigrant groups than of those of the 
white American group. 

Although only 136 arrests for abduction and kidnaping were 
recorded during the four years imder investigation, the seriousness 
of these crimes makes it advisable to observe among which nation- 
alities they occur. More than half of these arrests (76) were of white 
Americans, but of the total arrests of this group of persons they form 
a smaller proportion (0.044 per cent) than do arrests for the same 
crime of the total arrests of Austrians, Canadians, EngUsh, Greeks, 
Italians, and Russians. The largest proportion is that of ]bhe Greeks, 
which is 0.207 per cent, while the proportion found in the ItaUan 
group is only sfightly smaller, being 0.190 per cent. Among eight 
nationaUties — Bohemian, Chinese, Danish, French, Irish, Norwegian, 
Slavonian, and Scotch — no arrests for abduction and kidnaping were 
made. 

Simple assault, as shown b^ the preceding table, is more frequently 
an offense of most of the immigrant groups than of the native whites. 
Only the Danes, French, and Chinese (in addition to the American 
negroes) have smaller percentages of this crime than the white Ameri- 
cans. As in the case of the total offenses of personal violence, the 
highest percentage is found among the Ldthuanians and Slavonians, the 
former naving 5.6 per cent and the latter 5 per cent. The Italians, 
however, whose percentage of the total offenses of personal violence 
is next in rank to that of the Slavonians, have a smaller percentage 
of arrests for simple assault (3.1) than ten other nationahty groups. 

The greater proportion of simple assault among the crimes of peo- 
ples from eastern and southern Europe, as of tne total offenses of 
E»nal violence, is apparent. The nationaUties having the six 
»t percentages are the Lithuanian, Slavonian, Bohemian, Greek, 
h, and Russian. Of the south and east European peoples, only 
the Austrians and the ItaUans are exceeded in percentage of simple 
assault by any other peoples, and of these other peoples, only the 
Germans have a larger [)ercentage than the Austrians, and the Cana- 
dians, Germans, and Irish, than the ItaUans. Among ^e Scandi- 
navian peoples, among those from the British Isles (with the excep- 
tion of the Irish), among the French, and among both the white and 
negro Americans, the relative frequency of sinaple assault is less than 
amone the groups from the east and south of Europe. 

Violent assault includes aU aggravated forms or assault, such as 
the use of a weapon, mayhem, etc. It is, therefore, a much more 
serious crime than simple assault. It is notable that in spite of this 
difference in the gravity of the two kinds of assault, both should be 
relatively more frequent amoi^ the crimes of the Lithuanians and 
Slavonians than among those of anv other peoples. The largest per- 
centage of arrests for violent assault is that or the Slavonians, wnile 
the second in rank is that of the Lithuanians; of arrests for simple 
assaiilt the Lithuanian percentage is greatest and the Slavonian sec- 
ond in rank. The position of the ItaUan group, however, is quite 
different with regard to the two kinds of assamt, its percentage of 
siinple assault being less than the percentages of ten other groups, 
while its percentagcf of violent assault is exceeded only by the Sla- 
vonian and Lithuanian percentages. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



144 



The Immigration Commission. 



All but three of the nationaUty groups (the Swedish, Danish, and 
Chinese) have larger percentages of violent assault than the American 
whites. These three nationalities are the same three which alone 
have smaller percentages of the total offenses of personal violence 
than the white Americans. 

Violent assault, Uke the total of the offenses of personal violence 
and Uke simple assault, forms a lai^er proportion of the crimes of the 
people from Southern and Eastern Europe than of any other with 
these two exceptions: The American negroes and the Germans have 
higher percentages than the Russians, and the American n^roes 
than the Bohemians. The six nationality groups having the largest 
six percentages of violent assault are, however, the Slavonian, Lath- 
uaman, Italian, Polish, Austrian, and Greek. 

Gravest of all crimes of personal violence is homicide. Of the 
300,931 arrests for clearly denned offenses in Chicago during the four 
years under investigation, 3,108 were for homicide, accomplished or 
attempted.* Although 1,315 of these were the arrests of American 
whites, homicide forms a smaller part of white American crime than 
of the criminaUty of eleven foreign nationaUty groups and of the 
American negro. 

Homicide Forms 3.1 per cent of all offenses for which Italians were 
arrested. Of no other group of persons does it form more than 2 
per cent of the total cnmes, and this group of whose arrests 2 per 
cent were for homicide is the American negro. The Italians, Lith- 
uanians, Slavonians, Austrians, Greeks, and Poles all exceed in rel- 
ative frequency of homicide the peoples of northern and western 
Europe and the peoples of North Ainerica with the exception of the 
American n^roes. Of the nationaUties from the south and east of 
Europe only the Bohemians and the Russians have smaller percent- 
age of homicide than anjr nationality from northern and western 
Europe. Among the Russians this percentage is remarkably small, 
no group having a less percentage, although that of the Swedes and 
the Chinese is tne same (0.5 per cent). 

Because of the gravity of this offense it is worth while to enumer- 
ate those groups of offenders having larger proportions of arrests for 
homicide than the white Americans. Tney are the following: 



Italian 8.1 

American, negro 2.0 

Lithuanian 1. 9 

Slavonian 1. 7 

Austrian 1. 6 

Greek 1.6 



Poliah 1.5 

Daniflh 1.1 

German 1. 1 

Bohemian 1.Q 

French 9 

Irish 9 



The proportion of such arrests in the white American group is 0.8 
per cent. 

Ten immigrant groups have larger proportions of arrests for the 
crime of rape than the American wmte. These ten immigrant groups 
are the Austrian, Canadian, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, 
Norwegian, Polish, and Russian. Five of these have larger proper- 

a Homicide, as used in these statistics, includes murder, manslaughter, attempted 
homicide, and a few cases of ''accessory to murder.'! 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



145 



lions than the American negroes. The Greek croup has the lai^est 
proportion of all, or 0.64 per cent, while the Italian group has nearly 
as large a proportion, 0.63 per cent. Both of these percentages are 

ReUdxoe frequency ofhomidde: Chicago police arrests^ 1906-1908, 



NATIONALITY 



ITALIAN 

AMERICAN, NEGRO 

LITHUANIAN 

SLAVONIAN 

AUSTRIAN 

GRCCK 

POLISH 

DANISH 

GERMAN 

BOHEMIAN 

FRCtMCH 

IRI SH 

AMERICAN, WHITE 

ENGLISH 

NORWEGIAN 

SCOTCH 

CANADIAN 

CHINESE 

RUSSIAN 

SWEDISH 



more than twice that of the American white group, which is 0.3 per 
cent. The smallest proportion is found in the Slavonian group, only 
0.1 per cent of whose arrests were for rape. 



Digitized by 



Google 



146 



The Immigratioa Commission. 



OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

From the group of offenses against public policy, the following 
have been selected for special analysis: 

Table 85. — Offema agaxmt public policy compared with all offemeK Chicago poUe$ 

arreits, 1905 io 1908. 

NUMBER. 





All 
offensei. 


Offenses against public poUoj. 


NattonaUtf. 


Dis- 
orderly 
conduct. 




Offenses 

of 
violence. 


Va- 
grancy. 


Viola. 

tionof 
city ordi- 
nances. 


An 

other. 


TotaL 


Native-born: 

White 


171,120 
24,814 

8,897 
4,631 
2,120 
2,330 
1,137 
2,829 
913 

19,347 
4,821 

10,748 
7 865 
2,682 
2,401 

19,576 
9,240 
1,073 
1,051 
5,446 


96,614 
12,515 

2,279 
2^806 

200 

702 

1,582 

616 

11,869 

1,607 

8,224 

8;553 

1,565 

11728 

12,806 

4,084 

800 

667 

3,808 


11,608 
2,233 

181 
50 
64 
1,560 
44 
49 
16 

352 

686 
68 

200 
65 
25 

165 

418 
10 
15 

161 


''Si 
706 

158 
125 
82 
12 
25 
46 
14 
466 
118 
203 
602 
106 
58 
691 
140 
15 
45 
113 


1,867 
183 

21 
17 
10 
20 

6 
24 

3 
62 
12 
64 
84 

1 

12 
48 
60 
10 

3 
26 


10,974 
1,026 

822 

875 

150 

188 

149 

148 

94 

2,008 

1,487 

606 

094 

148 

144 

1,169 

>.«J 

64 

441 


2,806 
650 

61 
34 
36 
118 

9 
30 
10 
146 
81 
49 
61 

7 
12 
82 
99 

6 

3 
26 


127,318 


Negro 


17,216 


Hweign-bom: 

Aiistriao 


8.012 


BohemiftJi. ......... 


£407 


Canadian 


036 


Chinese...... 


Danish 


English 


1.839 


Froudi 


658 


Oenpan...x........ 


14,908 


Greek 


tm 


Irish 


0^201 


IfftHftn 


6,444 


I/lthnanlan......... 


1.8S1 


>7orwf«lAri , . . , 


r,m 


Polish 


14,931 


K'isslan.. . . . 


6w428 


Bootch 


014 


BlaTonlan ......... 


787 


RwfrtUh 


4,664 






Grand total 


300,931 


171,562 


17,988 


7,181 


2,478 


22,726 


4,230 


226,164 


Total natiTe-bom 

Total foreign-bom 


195,934 
104,997 


109,129 
62,433 


13,831 
4,157 


4,062 
3,099 


^«s 


12,000 
10,726 


3,446 
784 


144,628 
81.636 



PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



liative-bom: 

White 


100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


56.6 
50.4 

58.5 
63.9 
61.0 
11.1 
61.7 
66.6 
56.5 
61.8 
33.3 
76.6 
48.3 
60.6 
72.0 
65.4 
44.2 
74.6 
63.5 
69.9 


6.8 
9.0 

4.6 
1.1 
2.6 
66.7 
3.9 
2.1 
1.8 
1.8 
13.2 

.6 
2.7 
2.1 
1.0 

.8 
4.5 

.9 
1.4 
2.8 


2.0 
2.9 

4.1 
2.8 
1.5 
.6 
2.2 
2.0 
1.6 
2.4 
2.4 
1.9 
8.2 
4.1 
2.4 
8.5 
1.6 
1.4 
4.3 
2.1 


1.1 

i!o 


6.4 
4.1 

8.8 
8.8 
7.1 
8.0 
13.1 
6.4 
10.3 
10.4 
30.8 
5.7 
13.5 
5.7 
6.0 
6.0 
17.7 
6.9 
5.1 
8.1 




74.4 


Negro 




00.4 


VlQfeign-bom: 

Austrian........... 




77.8 


Bohemian... ^..i... 




77.2 


Canadian 




75.2 


Chinese 




02.0 


Danish 




82.2 


English 




70.0 


French 




1.6 


German......... . 




77.6 


Greek 




80.7 


Irish ^ 




85.6 


Italian 




74.0 


l/ithnanlan........ 




72.9 






82.4 


PoUsh.". 




76.8 


Knsirian.. .x. .. 




60.6 


Scotch 




85.2 


Slavonian 




74.9 


flw^l^fh, . . . 




83.8 








Grand total 


100.0 


67.0 


6.0 


2.4 


.8 


7.6 




76.2 








TaCal natiTe-bom 


100.0 
100.0 


55.7 
69.6 


7.1 
4.0 


2.1 
8.0 


1.0 
.4 


6.1 
10.2 




73.8 


IMal foreign-bom 




77.8 









• Lett than 0.05 per o«Qt. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 147 

But one of these (vagrancy) fonns a larger proportion of the total 
crimes of American whites than those of any immigrant group. Dis- 
onderly conduct, gaming, oflfenses of violence, and violations of city 
ordinances occur m larger proportions in the criminality of various 
immigrant groups than in the cnminaUty of the white American group. 

Nearly three-nfths ( 57 per cent) of all arrests for known offenses 
were for disorderly conduct, the number of such arrests being 171,562. 
"Disorderly conduct'* may stand for so many minor violations of the 
law, and probably includes so lar^e a proportion of cases of drunken- 
ness,« that it reveals little. In observing the distribution of arrests 
for such offenses among the various nationalities, practically all that 
can be assumed is that these arrests represent a minor sort of crimi- 
nality. Thirteen of the foreign groups have larger proportions of such 
arrests than the American whites, of whose total arrests they com- 
pose 56.5 per cent. Of the total number of Irish immigrants arrested, 
76.6 per cent were charged with disorderly conduct, a larger propor- 
tion than that found in any other group. The Scotch are second in 
rank, with 74.6 per cent; the Norwegians third, with 72 per cent; the 
Sweaes fourth, with 69.9 per cent, and the English fifth, with 66.6 per 
cent. In addition to these nationaUties, the Polish, Bohemian, Sla- 
vonian, Canadian, Danish, German, Lithuanian, and Austrian all 
exceed the American white group in percentage of arrests for disor- 
derly conduct. Of all the groups shown in the table only one has less 
than one-third of its arrests of this character. This group is the 
Chinese, whose proportion of arrests for disorderly conauct is only 
11.1 per cent. 

While the Chinese percentage of disorderly conduct is less than that 
of all other groups, its proportions of arrests for gaming, or gambling, 
is much greater than tnat of any other group. Of the 2,339 Chinese 
arrested for all crimes, 1,560, or 66.7 per cent were charged with 
gaming. This percentage is so much in excess of that of any other 
group as to make the Chmese stand out prominently in respect to this 
offense. The percentage next in rank is only 13.2 (tnat of the 
Greeks), or one-fifth the Chinese percentage. The Chinese and Gh*eek, 
however, are the only immigrant groups exceeding the American 
white in proportion of arrest for gaming, although the American 
n^roes, in addition to the Chinese and Greeks, have a larger propor- 
tion than the American whites. The American negro proportion 
is 9 per cent and the American white 6.8 per cent. Thus, sixteen of the 
eighteen foreign nationaUties have smaller proportions of arrests of 
this character than each of the American groups. The smallest pro- 
portion is that of the Irish group, or 0.6 per cent. 

Offenses of violence against pubUc policy consist of carrying con- 
cealed weapons, resisting an officer, and riot. They thus are similar 
in character to offenses of personal violence, and certain nationali- 
ties which stand out prominently with respect to offenses of personal 
violence ^ occupv similar positions with respect to offenses of vio- 
lence against public poUcy. While the comparative relations of the 
various nationaUties is not the same, the three groups having the 
largest percentages of offenses of personal violence are exceeded in 

<* The Chicago police reports contain no statement of arrests for drunkenness. 
» See Table 84. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



148 



The ImmigraticHi Commisekm. 



percent«^e of offenses of violence against public policj by no nation- 
ality, "niese hitter offenses f onn 8.2 per cent of all crimes of Italians, 
4.3 per cent of those of Slavonians, and 4.1 per cent of those or 
Lithuanians. With the exception of the Austrians, whose percentage 
is the same as that of tJie Lithuanians (4.1), no group of persons has 

Relative frequency of qffente* of violence agamil pubUe ptiiey: Odeago police arrette, 

1906-1908. 



NATIONALITY 



2 4 6 8 10 



ITALIAN 

SLAVONIAN 

AUSTRIAN 

LITHUANIAN 

POLISH 

AMERICAN, Ne6R0 

BOHEMIAN 

GERMAN 

GREEK 

NORWEGIAN 

DANISH 

SWEDISH 

AMERICAN, WHITE 

ENGLISH 

IRISH 

CANADIAN 

FRENCH 

RU S SI AN 

SCOTCH 

CHINESE 




a higher percentage than 3.5. The relation of the Chinese to other 
nationalities is the same with regard to offenses of violence against 
public policy as with regard to offenses of personal violence; a smaller 
percentage of their crimes than of the total crimes of any other group 
of persons is made up of these two classes of crime. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 149 

Among eleven, or more than half, of the groups of foreign birth, 
and among the American negroes, tnese offenses are relatively more 
frequent than amon^ the American whites. Among the Irish, Cana- 
dians, French, Russians, Scotch, and Chinese they form a smaller 
proportion of the total criminality, while their pro{>ortion of English 
crimes is the same as that of the crimes of the white Americans, or 
2iper cent. 

Vagrancy forms less than 1 per cent of the total offenses of every 

group except the American white and the English. The former group 
as the largest proportion, 1.1 per cent, and the latter the second in 
rank, 1 per cent. Thus every immigrant group is exceeded in per- 
centage of arrests for vagrancv by the American white. Two immi- 
grant groups, however^ave larger proportions of such arrests than 
the American negro. These are the Chinese and the Scotch, each of 
which has 0.9 per cent, while the American negro group has 0.7 per 
cent. Of the various groups shown in this table the Lithuanian nas 
the smallest proportion, only 1 of its arrests, or less than five one- 
hundredths or 1 per cent, being for vagrancy. 

While violatiojis of city ormnances are not essentially a valuable 
index of the character of criminality, the prevalence of such offenses 
among the nationaUties is of interest. The large percentage of these 
offenses among the Greeks (30.8 per cent), more than twice that of 
any nationaUtv except the Russian, is striking. The Greek percent- 
age is nearly five times that of the American whites (6.4) and more 
than seven times that of the American negroes (4.1). It is notable 
that twelve of the eighteen foreign nationidities have larger percent- 
ages of violations of citv ordinances than the American smites. The 
English, Norwegian, Pohsh, Irish, Lithuanian, and Slavonian (in 
admtion to the American negro) are the ^oups having smaller pro- 
portions of arrests than the American white group, the smallest pro- 
portion, 5.1 per cent, being that of the Slavonians. 

OFFENSES AGAINST OHASTITT. 

There remains the group of offenses against chastity. Of the 
various crimes constituting this group, omy those of prostitution 
have been selected for further survey. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



150 The Immigration Commission. 



t 



I 
•f 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



151 



Table 86.— O/erwet Offomit cha$tUy compared with all offmnt: Chicago poUee arresU^ 

1906 to 1908. 

NUMBER. 





AUof. 

isnaea. 


Offenses against chastity. 


NatkmaUty. 


Crimes of 

prostita- 

tion. 


AU others. 


TotaL 


Natiye-bom: 

White 


171,120 
24,814 


7,077 
1,625 


1,057 
258 


8,134 


Negro 


1,878 




Foreign-boin: 

Austrian .....•••..... 


8,8»7 
4,681 
2,126 
2,339 
1,137 
2,829 
913 

19,347 
4,821 

10,743 
7,355 
2,582 
2,401 

19,575 
9,240 
1,073 
1,051 
5,446 


186 
46 
72 

101 
20 
64 
94 

899 
48 

114 

172 
16 
46 

161 

788 

15 

9 

81 


45 

49 
18 
1 
4 
12 
12 
160 
47 
83 
52 
89 
18 
250 
97 
4 
22 
50 


181 


Bobflin Ian 


95 


Canadian . ..a.. • 


8i 


Chinese.... 


108 


Danish 


M 


EnglWi 


7t 


Fruich 


106 


Qennan 


669 


Greek 


90 


Irish 


147 


Italian.. . 


2M 




5( 


Nww-gim 


m 


Polishr. 


428 


Rtunian 


880 


Sootch 


U 


Slavonian 


81 


RWfKlf«Fh ,.,, 


140 






Grand total 


800,931 


11,148 


2,803 


18,446 






Total native-bom 


195,934 
104,997 


8,702 
2,441 


1,810 
993 


10,012 


Total fofeign-bom 


8,434 







PBR CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native-born: 

White 


100.0 
100.0 


4.1 

6.6 




4.8 


Negro 




7.6 








Foreign-bom: 

Anstrlsn 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


8.6 
1.0 
8.4 
4.8 
1.8 
2.7 
10.8 
2.1 

.9 
1.1 
2.3 

.6 
1.9 

.8 
7.9 
1.4 

.9 
1.5 




4.6 


Bohemian .... 




2.1 


Canadian 




4.0 


ChtncBo ,,,. . ,.,, 




4.4 


Danish. 




2,1 


TCfigihh, 




3.8 


French 




11.6 


German , » ^ ^ 




2.9 


Greek 




1.9 


Irish 




1.4 


Italian 




3.0 


Lithuanian . .....x 




2.1 


Norwegian '.,. 




2.6 


Poliiih '\ , , 




2.1 


Rtiffftian x u .....*. x . * 




9.0 


Scotch 




1.8 


Slavonian x..x.xx.x..^ ^ 




2.9 


Swedish 




2.6 








Grand total ..*x. ».x*. *x** 


100.0 


8.7 




4.6 








Total native-bom 


100.0 
100.0 


4.4 

2.3 




5.2 


Total foreign-bom 




8.8 









It here appears that practically the same relation of the nation- 
alities exists as in the figures grouping all offenses against chastity 
together.^ The French show the largest proportion of crimes of 
prostitution, or 10.3 per cent — almost two and a half times that 
of the white Americans — while the Russians have the next highest 



Digitized by 



Google 



152 



The Immigration Commissicm. 



proportion, or 7.9 per cent, which is nearly twice that of the Amer- 
ican whites. These and the Chinese are the only groups of foreign- 
bom persons exceeding the American whites in percentage of these 
crimes. The latter, however, have a smaller percentage than the 
American negroes, the American white proportion bem^ 4.1 per 
cent and the American ne^o 6.5 per cent. The proportion found 
in the Lithuanian group is the smallest ap|>earing m the above 
table; it is 0.6 per cent. Three other groups have less than 1 per 
cent of their arrests consisting of those for crimes of prostitution — 
the Polish (0.8 per cent), and the Greek and Slavonian (0.9 per 
cent each). 

RelaHve frequency of crimes of prosHtutum: Chicago police arreOSf 1905-1908. 



NATIONALITY 



FRENCH 
RUSSIAN 
AMERICAN, NEfiRO 
CHINE SE 
AMERICAN, WHITE 

AUSTRIAN 
CANADIAN 
ENGLISH 
ITALIAN 




SUMMAEY. 

Arrests for that group of offenses designated as "gainful" form a 
smaller proportion of the total arrests of every inmiigrant nationality 
than of the total arrests of the native-born whites or negroes. When 
analysis is made of the various crimes gathered in this category, only 
two groups of foreign-bom offenders are found to have larger percent- 
ages of arrests for any of them than the American-bom whites . ^ These 
two immigrant groups are those coming from Italy and Russia, the 
percentage of arrests for forgery and fraud of the former being 
greater than that of the white Americans, and for larceny and receiv- 
m^ stolen property of the latter, while arrests for extortion fo^in 
a larger percentage of the total arrests of* both the Italians and 
Russians than of the total arrests of the American whites. In the 
case of forgery and fraud, the Italian percentage is not only greater 
than that of the American whites, but greater than that of the 
American negroes. In the case of larceny and receiving stolen 
property, the percentage of the American negroes is greater than that 
of the Russians, although the latter percentage is in excess of the 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



158 



percentage of the white Americans. With regard to burglary and 
robbery, however, no group of immigrant offenders has a nigher 
percentile than either the American white or the American negro 
group, although of arrests for robbery the percentages of the Lith- 
uanian and Norwegian ^oups eaual the American negro percentage* 
Arrests for burglary ana for roboery form larger proportions of Sie 
total arrests of American whites than of those of American negroes. 

Of all groups of offenders, the Chinese has the smallest percentage 
of arrests for the gainful offenses, not only when these offenses are 
considered in the aggregate, but also when the specific crimes of 
burglary, forgery and fraud, larceny and receiving stolen goods, and 
robbery are considered separately. 

The relations of the other nationalities differ so much with regard to 
the various specific gainful offenses that no cumulative evidence con- 
cerning any of them appears. The most striking revelation of the 
figures is that the arrests of inmiigrant offenders are less freauently 
for the gainful offenses than are tnose of American white onenders 
(with the exception of the arrests of Italians for extortion and for 
forgery and fraud and of Russians for extortion and for larceny and 
receivmg stolen property). 

Table 87. — RelaHve frequency of gainful offenses: Chicago police arrests ^ 1905 to 1908 • 



NatlonaUty. 


Percent. 


NaUonaUty. 


Percent. 


Attffoinfuloffenta. 
American, Negro 


16.4 
14.8 
12.4 
12.3 
11.4 
11.1 
10.8 
10.7 
10.7 
lafi 
10.0 
9.6 
9.6 
9.2 
8.6 
7.6 
7.6 
6.6 
6.6 
1.9 

2.9 

2.8 

1.7 

1.7 

1.7 

1.6 

1.3 

1.2 

1.2 

1.1 

1.1 

1.0 

1.0 

1.0 

.9 

.9 

.8 

.5 

.6 

.1 


Ettortkm, 
TtaHft?!.. 


a068 


Aim^ri<rftTij wjiit^ , - , , 


Russian ........ 


.054 


Rnssian . .'. 


American. White 


.015 


CADadifm 


Oennan 


.010 


Italian 


Irish 


.009 


Qflnxtan 


Polish 


.OOf 


liithitanian 


American, Negro, 


• OM 


English 


Forgery andfrtud. 

Tt#lf an . . , 




p^ftiOi, 




French 




Bobfonian 


2.1 


Panish , 


American. White 


2.0 


SlaTonian 


Paniflh 


2.0 


Anstrian 


Austrian . . t 




Norwftflan 


Canadian 




Oreek.^ 


German 




Swedish 


English 




Scotch 


Russian 




Irish 


I^ithuanian 




ChlnnW 


Swedish 






Norwegian 




Burglary. 


French 






Bohemian. T 




Amfffican, Whlt^ ...... r ... ^ ........ , 


Greek 




Anwican. Neirro- .,.,., 


ATnerican, Negro 




«s»«s«« ................ 


Slavonian'. . . " 




Canadian . . t 


Irish 




Gfrman ....... . . r r r . r 


Polish 




Polish 


Scotch 




English 


Chinese 




Aostrian 


Larceny and receiving stolen property, 
American, Negro ................... x . ^ » 




Ttj^llftn ....,.,. 




Tinn\fh 




Scotch 


10.2 


Norwegian 


Russian ,...,,* 


9.2 


Kniwian .........,.,,., t . . 


American, White 


8.0 


Slavonian 


Panadian , 


7.8 


Greek 


French 


7.8 


T4thaanian 


Polish 


7.1 


French 


Italian 


7.0 


Irish 


T/ithuanlan , 


7.0 




Ofcman , ..........^ 


6.9 


Chlneee ! 1 [^'.\^^^, 


Slavonian 


«.» 



79340*— VOL 36—11 ^11 



Digitized by 



Google 



154 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table ST.—ReUuivefrequeney of gainful ofenses: Chicago police arruts, 1905 to 1908- 

GonUnued. 



NationaUty. 


Percent. 


NatlonaUty. 


PeroenL 


Lareenv and receiving ttoUn property^ 

Continued. '^ *^ 
EncUsh 


6.8 
6.0 
5.7 
6.4 

6.0 
4.9 
4.7 
4.2 
3.7 
1.6 

L8 
1.5 
1.5 
1.5 


i2o6b<ry— condnaed. 


1.4 


BmMnlaii ... 


Bohemian . . . 


1.3 


Panlffh 


Rnglish 


1. 1 


Austrian 


Canadian .... ....... 


1.0 


flwAdlah 


ItaUan 


1.0 


Greek 


Austrian 




Norw<^an 


French 




ScotchT 


Slavonian 




Irish 


German 




Chinese.... 


Greek ...;.. 






Danish 




Robben 


Iilah 






Russian 




American, White 


Swedish 




American! Negro 


Scotch 






Chinese 




Norwefftan 











With regard to the oflFenses of personal violence, four facts stand 
out clearly in Table 88, which sums up the relations of the several 
nationahties to them: (1) That of the arrests of most of the foreign- 
bom groups, those for offenses of personal violence form larger pro- 
portions than they do of the arrests of the American whites ; (2) tJiat of 
this class of crimes the Lithuanians, Slavonians, and Italians have 
larger proportions of arrests than any other nationahties; (3) that 
the Chmese alone have a smaller percentage of arrests for the whole 
^up of offenses of personal violence and for the specific crimes of 
simple assault, violent assault, and homicide than tne white Ameri- 
cans; and (4) that the relative frequency of arrests is less among 
American negro offenders for the offenses of personal violence as a 
class, and for simple and violent assault considered separately, than 
among a considerable number of the foreign nationalities, the percent- 
age 01 arrests among the American negroes appearing large only in 
the case of homicide, and even here being exceeded by that of the 
ItaUans. 



Table 88. — Relative freqiiency of offenses of personal violence: Chicago 

1905 to 1908, 


police arresU^ 


NaUonaUty. 


Per cent. 


NationaUty. 


Percent. 


AU offenses of personal violence. 
I/lth?iAnianT . . '- . 


12.1 
11.5 
10.6 
9.4 
9.3 
8.2 
7.8 
6.C 
6.4 
6.4 
6.6 
6.6 
6.0 
4.9 
4.9 
4.8 
4.4 
4.3 
4.3 
1.6 


Abduction and kidnaping. 
Greek 


aao7 


Slavonian 


Italian 


.190 


Italian 


English 


.086 


Polish 


Austrian 


.077 


Greek 


Russian 


.054 


Bohemian - 


Canadian 


.047 


Austrian 


American, White 


.044 


German - 


Lithuanian 


.039 


Russian 


Swedish 


.087 


AniArirHn, Npgrp , . . , 


German 


.036- 




Polish 


.026 


Irish 


American, Negro 


.024 


English 


Bohemian 




Norwegian 


Chinese 




Scotch 


Danish 




French 


French 




American, White 


Irish 




Danish -. , 


Norwegian 




Swedish 


Slavonian 




Chinese 


Scotch 





Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



155 



Table ^.—RelaHvt frequency of offenses of personal violence: Chicago police arrests, 

1905 to 1905— Continued. 



NationaUty. 


Per cent. 


Nationality. 


Percent 


Llthnaiiiftii 


5.6 
&0 
47 
4.5 
4.4 
4.0 
3.6 
3.8 
3.3 
8.2 
3.1 
2.7 
2.7 
2.6 
2.4 
2.8 
2.3 
2.1 
1.8 
.6 

4.7 
4.4 
8.5 
3.0 
2.6 
2.4 
2.2 
2.2 
1.6 
1.5 
1.5 
1.4 
1.3 
1.2 
1.2 
1.1 
1.0 
.9 
.7 
.4 


Italian *. 


3.1 


BtavoiiJan 


American, Negro. ....................... 


2.0 


Bohfnnlan r 


I/ithnazilaii . 


1 9 


Greek. 


Slavonian 


1.7 


P0»*#h .., . 


Austrian. 


1.6 


Russian 


Greek 


1.0 


QennaD . . . ... 


PollRh 


1 6 


Affiftrlftn 


Pantflh.. 


1.1 


nf|n||/1lAn 


German , 


1 1 


Irish 


Bohemian 


1.0 


Ttftitftn 


French 


9 


R^«#11ffh 


Trinh , 


.9 


Scotch 


Anierioan, W^**^ - 


.8 


Fnglish 


English .' 


s 


NOTweglan 


Norwegian 


.8 


ATn^fli<^r^ WhIW 


Scotch 


.8 


Danish...' 


Oanadiai) -r. 


.6 


French 


Chinese 


.5 


Ajneiififtn , NAgro- - 


Knsslan^- 


.5 


Chinese 


flw«<1l«h - . 


.5 


VMentoiMvU. 
Slayonlan 


Rape. 
Greek 


.64 


T-Hhnanlan 


Italian 


.63 


Tte^lfin 


Polish 


.40 


PoUsh 


Canadian 


.38 


Anftrlan , . . , . 


Austrian ^-.^^,-,^^,^, ,,,,.,.,., 


.36 


Greek 


A"ierican, Negro........ 


.34 


Am^jican, Ki»gro . . . , .... 


English. .....T 


.34 


Bohemiaii ....*'. 


Ru^ilan- T ........... . 


.34 


G^rmftTi .,.-,.,.. r 


Norwegian 


.33 


Prench 




.329 


RiissiaQ . T 




.326 


Norwegian...^ 

Irish .vr!v....r^ 


American, WhitA - - , , , 


.30 


Bohemian 


.29 


Canadian 


Scotch 


.28 


English 


Irish 


.26 


Scotch 


Swedish 


.24 


American, White 


Dfinlfh .„..,. 


.18 


Swedish..' 


Chinese 


.17 


BfriHah 


T/ittiimniftn..,. . ., 


.15 


Chinese 


Slavonian 


.10 









The total of offenses against public policy is proportionalljr greater 
among the Chinese offenses than among those of any other nationaUty. 
This is chiefly, due to the large number of Chinese gambhng cases. 
Of offenses oi violence against pubUc poUcy the Italians, Slavonians, 
Austrians, and Lithuanians have the nighest percentages of arrests. 
This is significant when it is remembered that three of these, the 
Italians, Slavonians, and Lithuanians, have the greatest relative 
frequency of arrests for offenses of personal violence. The violation of 
city ordinances is far more common among the Greeks than among 
any other group of persons. The higher percentage of arrests for 
vagrancy among the American whites and the English than among 
any other nationalities is also noteworthy. 

With the exception of vagrancy, the offenses against public policy 
are more common among most of the immigrant groups than among 
the native white group. 



Digitized by 



Google 



156 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table S9,-— Relative frequenqf of offenses against public policy: Chicago police arrests, 

1906 to 1908. 



Chinese 

Irish 


92.0 
85.6 
85.2 
83.8 
82.4 
82.2 
80.7 
7».0 
77.3 
77.2 
77.0 
7«.3 
75.2 
74.9 
74.4 
74.0 
72.9 
71.5 
00.6 
00.4 

76.6 
74.6 
72.0 
00.9 
66.6 
65.4 
63.9 
63.5 
61.9 
61.7 
61.3 
60.6 
58.5 
56.5 
56.5 
60.4 
48.3 
44.2 
33.3 
11.1 

66.7 

13.2 

9.0 

6.8 

4.6 

4.5 

8.9 

2.8 

2.7 

2.6 

2.1 

2.1 

1.8 

1.8 

1.4 

1.1 

1.0 

.9 

.8 

.6 


Italian 

Slavonian 


8.3 
4.3 
4.1 
4.1 
3.5 
2.9 


Scotch 

Swedish 


Lithuanian 

Polish 

American, Negro 


Oreek 

£Dglbh 


Bohemian 

G 


2.8 
2.4 


Aufttriftfli 


G 


2.4 




N 


X4 




D 


X2 


Polish 


8^ 


2.1 


C^nft/iiftn 


A te 


2.0 




E 


2.0 




Ii 


1.9 


ItaUAD 


O 


1.5 




F 


L5 




R 


1.5 


Russl&iL 


84 


1.4 




CI 


.5 


Ditorderlp conduct. * 
Irish 


Vagrancy. 
American, White 


1.1 


Scotch 


English..'. 




Norwegian 


nhfti^^jw . 




Swedish 


Scotch 




English 


American, Npgro. 




PoSsh 


Ru.s8ian .... 










Slavonian 


Cfuiftrii^^ 




Canadian. 


DAnLqh _ . . _ , . , 




Danish 


Irish 




German 


rtAllan 




Lithuanian 


Norwegian 




Austrian 


Swedish. 




American, White 


Rohemtftn . . ... 




French 


French 




American. Nesro 


German 




Italian.......:. 


Slavonian 




Hnssian 


Greek.. 




Oreek 


Polish 




Chinese 


Lithnanian 


ao.8 


Gaming. 
Chinese 


Violation of city ordinanca. 
Greek 


<Jreek 


Russian 


17.7 


■American, Negro 


TtAllAn , 


13.5 


American, White 


Danish 


13.1 


AiBtrian 


German 


10.4 


f^^isfllaa 


French 


las 


Darlsh. 


Austrian 


8.3 


Swedish. 


Bohemian 


8.8 


Italian 


Swedish 


8.1 


Canadian. 


Chinese 


8.0 


English 


Canadian 


7.1 


I^it^MAnian. 


Scotch *. 


6.9 


French ;;. 


A m^rican, Whltp .... . 


6.4 


Oerman 


English 


6.4 


fllAV^nlAn . , 


Norwegian 


6.0 


Bohemian. 


Polish 


6.0 


Norwegiaa 


Irish 


6.7 


8»wiu...::. ...... ..........:;;::::::: 


LHhnanlan 


6b7 


Ponsh. 


Slavonian 


5.1 


Irish 


American, Negro 


4.1 









« Less than 0.05 per oeot. 

The figures of offenses against chastity, as presented in Table 90, 
show that the greatest proportion of such offenses is found among 
the French offenders and that crimes of prostitution form a larger 
percentage of the total crimes of that nationaUty than of those of any 
other. With the exception of the French and Russian immigrant 
groups, offenses against chastity taken as a whole, and crimes of 



Digitized byCriOOQlC 



Immigration and Crime. 



157 



prostitution considered separately, are more frequent causes of arrest 
among American white offenders than among those of any foreign- 
bom ^up, although thev form larger percentages of the crimes of 
American negroes than they do of the crimes of American whites* 
The American negro percentage is, however, in both instances less 
than the French or Russian. 

Table 90. — Relative frequency of offenses against chastity: Chicago police arrests, 1905 to 

1908. 



NationaUty. 


Percent. 


NationaUty. 


Percent, 


AU of etuet against eha$tUp. 
French 


11.6 
9.0 
7.6 
4.8 
4.6 
4.4 
4.0 
3.3 
3.0 
2.9 
2.9 
2.6 
2.6 
2.1 
2.1 
2.1 
2.1 
1.9 
1.8 
1.4 


Ortmet of prottUutUm. 
French 


10. a 


Rosslaii 


Russian .....^...^xxx^ ...^ 


7 d 


American, Negro 


Amerioan, Negro ... . .. 


6.& 


Amerioani WJTlte 


Chinese 


4.a 


A nittriaD 


Amerinan, White .... 


4.1 


Chinese 


Austrian.'. 


3.& 


nnHA/IKn 


Canadian 


3.4 


"Rnglteh 


TCncrlVrh 


2.7 


It^Ran . . . , 


Ttfttlf^n , 


2. a 


Q^mian 


German 


2.1 


81fiTonlan 




i.a 


Swedish 


PftTiish 


i.a 


N^orwegian 


flv^tsh 


1.& 


Bohenuan 


Scotch 


i.i 


PftPiffh 


Irish 


i.i 


J4thaanian 


Bohemian 


1.0 


Pf^llsh 


Greek 


.d 


Greek 


Blayonian 


.d 


Scotch 


Polish. 


1 


Irish 


T/ithnanian 









Digitized by 



Google 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Chapter X. 

THE STATE OF MASSACEITSETTS. 

Commitments to Penal Institutions. 

Periodic reports of all commitments are made to the State board 
of prison commissioners by all penal institutions in Massachusetts. 
These reports show the country of birth of each offender and (with 
the exception of those from the State farm <*) of his father, together 
with the crime for which he was committed and other personaldata. 
From these records much valuable information regarding the crimi- 
naUty of imm^rants and natives may be obtained. In the yearly 
reports of the Massachusetts board of prison commissioners some of 
this information is pubUshed, but no ngures are given showing the 
correlation of nativity and parentage with specific crimes. 

In order to make avaUable more of the data contained in these 
excellent records, agents were employed by the Immigration Com- 
mission to copy from the original reports fued with the State board 
of prison commissioners data showing country of birth, country of 
birth of father, and crime for which committed, of all persons com- 
mitted to Massachusetts penal institutions during the year ending 
September 30, 1909. These data were then tabulated to conform as 
nearly as possible to the other tabulated data on crime that have 
been compiled by the Immigration Commission. In the returns 
obtained from the Massachusetts records there appear a number of 
commitments of persons unconvicted of crime but confined in penal 
institutions to await trial. So far as possible these were excfuded 
from the tables prepared. The tabular results are therefore designed 
to show only convicted persons committed to penal institutions 
throughout the State of Massachusetts during tne period of one 
year. Because of failure definitely to report the offenses a few cases 
must be omitted from the analysis. To avoid confusion these cases 
are not included in any of the tables, and the total number of com- 
mitments shown here is thus rendered somewhat less than the actual 
number. This difference, however, is only slight and does not 
seriously detract from the value of the data. 

The total number of commitments for known offenses during the 
period covered was 31,646. The distribution of these commitments 
oy character of institution is as follows: 

Jails and houses of correction 27, 092 

Massachusetts refonnatory 705 

Reformatory prison for women 335 

State prison 198 

State farm 3, 316 

Total 31.646 

The reports of the State turn alone fail to show the country of birth of the offender's 
fetther. 

159 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



160 



The Immigration Commission. 



As the reports of the State farm do not show the country of birth 
of the fathers of offenders, and are therefore not wholly comparable 
with those of other institutions, it has been deemed advisable to 
separate its 3,316 commitments from the others. The total number 
of conmiitments contained in the combined tabulation of all institu- 
tions other than the State farm is therefore 28,330. The analysis 
has been confined to these. In 10 of these 28,330 cases no report 
was made of either the country of birth of the oflFender or of his 
father. From the discussion of the various nativity and parentage 
groups these 10 cases must therefore be excluded. 

Some of the countries of birth of foreim-bom offendera, and of 
the fathers of native-bom oflFenders, furnish such small quotas that 
they have not been retained as separate groups in the analysis, 
although included in the totals of the general nativity and parentage 
groups. The distinct groups whose relations to crime are analyzed 
and the total commitments of each are as follows: 

Tablb 91. — CommitTnenU to penal insUtiUiont in Ma8$<uhu9eU$, October i» 190S, to 
September SO, 1909 , bff nativity and parentage of offender. 

[This table doei not include oommitmente to the State fBrm.] 



Nativity and parentage. 


Commit- 
ments. 


Nativity and parentage. 


Commit 
ments. 


Natlye-bora of native lather 


6,288 

1,176 
529 
200 

7,278 
271 

337 

2,676 

1,036 

201 

155 


Ireland .x.. ............... 




Native-bom of fordgn father, by country 
of birth of father: 


6,351 
480 


Italy 


Canada 


Poland. 


220 


England 


Ruirta 

Sootlapd.... 


m 


Germany 


4» 


Irelan d .'. 


Sweden 


281 


Scotland.. 


Orand total 




F(weign-b<xii: 


• 28,330 


Austria-Hungary 


Native-bom of foreign lather 




Canada 


9,810 
M5,219 


England 


Total native-bom..^ I... 


Finland ...* .»». 




13,101 


Qermany ...................... ^ ... , 


1 







« Includes 10 commitments of persons not reporting nativity. 
* Includes 121 coomltments of peitons not reporting pareotafib 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



161 



OLASSBS OF CRIME. 

These commitments are shown by classes of crime in the following 
table: 

Table 92.— Dutn&ution of classes of crime: Massachusetts penal instittUionSi October 1^ 
1908, to September SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 



Nativity and parentage. 


Total. 


Gainful 
offenses. 


Offanses 
of per- 
sonal 

violence. 


Offenses 

against 
public 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
chastity. 


Unclassi- 
fied 
offenses. 


Kative-tom of native father 


6,288 

1.176 
629 
200 

7,278 
271 

237 

2,676 

1,036 

201 

155 

6,361 

460 

220 

573 

430 

281 


1,000 

220 
76 
86 

726 
88 

31 
308 
78 
11 
30 
2^ 
93 
33 
95 
37 
16 


278 

62 
28 
8 
260 
4 

64 

134 
56 
14 
12 
180 
108 
36 
89 
12 
18 


3,508 

831 
400 
138 
6,074 
212 

146 
2,038 
848 
173 
104 
6.718 
188 
147 
367 
37G 
243 


203 

43 
12 

6 
113 

9 

8 
134 

28 
1 
5 

70 

50 
3 

17 
8 
5 


119 


ofblnhoffatber: 
r>ftnadft 


30 


England 


18 


Germany : 


13 


Ixwland.l 


105 


Scotland 


8 


Foreign-born: 

Austrio-Hunsanr 


8 


Canada 


01 


England 


20 


Finland 


2 


Germany. 


4 


Ireland.: 


92 


Italy 


11 


Poland 


1 


Bnssia 


15 


fi<v>tland 


f 


Sweden 


4 






Grand total 


a2S,330 


3,481 


1,440 


22,099 


765 


646 






Native-bom of foreign father 


9.810 

M5,219 

13,101 


1,216 
2,361 
1,110 


378 
667 
783 


7,835 
11,493 
10,607 


198 
405 
360 


183 


Total nativA-bom .*.......... ^ . 


308 


Foreign-bom 


242 







PER CENT OP TOTAL NUMBER. 



Nativity and parentage. 


Total. 


Gainful 
offenses. 


Offenses 
of per- 
sonal 
violence. 


Offenses 
against 
pabUo 
policy. 


Offenses 
agahist 
chastity. 


Unclassi- 

fled 
offenses. 


Native-bora of native father 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


20.6 

18.7 
14.4 
18.0 
10.0 
14.0 

13.1 
11.6 
7.6 
6.6 
19.4 
4.4 
20.7 
16.0 
16.6 
8.4 
6.7 


6.8 

4.4 

4.3 
4.0 
3.6 
1.6 

22.8 
6.0 
6.8 
7.0 
7.7 
3.0 
24.0 
16.4 
16.6 
2.7 
4.6 


68.0 

70.7 
76.6 
69.0 
83.6 
78.2 

61.6 
76.2 
81.9 
86.1 
67.1 
90.0 
41.8 
66.8 
62.8 
85.6 
86.6 


3.8 

3.7 
2.3 
2.6 
1.6 
3.3 

1.8 
5.0 
2.8 
.5 
3.2 
1.1 
11.] 
1.4 
3.0 
1.8 
1.8 




Native-born of foreign lather, by country 
of birth of father: 
Canada. .......................... 




England 




Genuany 




TiAland 




Scotland 




Foreign-bora: 

Ansbrla-Hnngary 




Canada T. .' 




Encland 




Finland 




Germany 




Ireland 




Italy 




Poland 




Russia 




Scotland 




Sweden 








Grand total 


100.0 


12.3 


6.1 


78.0 


2.7 








Native-bora of foreign father 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


12.4 
15.6 
8.6 


3.9 
4.3 
6.0 


79.9 
75.6 
80.9 


2.0 
2.7 
2.7 




Total natlve-bom . ." 




Forelgn-fcora. .......t.. 









a Includes 10 commitment^ of persons not reporting nativitv. 
ft Includes 121 commitments of persons not reporting parentage. 



Digitized by 



Google 



162 The Immigration G>mmis8ion. 

This table shows that only one group of immigrant offenders has a 
larger proportion of commitments for the gainml offenses than the 
group of those native-bom of native father. This unique inunigrant 
group is that of Italian birth, of whose total conmaitments those for 
the gainful offenses form 20.7 per cent. Between this percentage and 
that of the native-bom of native father, however, the difference is 
slight, the latter being 20.6 per cent. Not only does no immigrant 
group except that of Italian oirth have so high a percentage of com- 
mitments for the gainful offenses as that of the native-bom of non- 
immigrant parentage, but the percentage of none of the groups of 
American-bom offenders of foreign father equals it. Indeed, two 
groups of the foreign-bom — those from Italy and Germany — exceed all 
American-bom groups of foreign parentage in percentage of the gainful 
offenses. Five of the inamigrant nationalities, however — the Scotch, 
English, Swedish, Finnish, and Irish — have smaller percentages than 
any group of native-bom offenders having immigrant fathers. 

The smallest proportion of commitments for the gainful offenses 
is that of foreign-bom offenders from Ireland, of whose total com- 
mitments these form but 4.4 per cent. Of native-bom offenders of 
foreim parentage, those whose fathers come from Ireland have the 
smallest proportion, 10 per cent, although this percentage is greater 
than that or the foreign-bom groups from Ireland, Finland, Sweden, 
England, and Scotland. The largest percentage found among the 
groups of native birth but foreign parentage is tnat of persons whose 
Fathers emigrated from Canada. Of theu* total commitments 18.7 
per cent were for the gainful offenses, a proportion exceeded only by 
those of the Italian and German foreign groups and the group native- 
born of native father. 

Of the five groups native-bom of foreign par^jitage, four have 
larger percentages than the foreign groups from their fathers' country 
of birth. The single exception is that of persons bom in the United 
States whose fathers came from Germany, their percentage being 18, 
while that of persons of German birth is 19.4. The groups of Canadian, 
English, Irisn, and Scotch parentage have respectively larger per- 
centages than the groups of Canadian, Englisn, Irish, and Scotch 
birth. 

Six of tiie 11 immigrant groups appearing in the preceding table 
have higher percentages of commitments for offenses of personal vio- 
lence than the group of persons native-bom of native father. Of these 
six the Italian has trie largest percentage, offenses of personal violence 
causing 24 per cent of all the commitments of persons bom in Italy. 
Next in rank is the Austro-Hungarian group, whose percentage is 
22.8. Following this is the Polish percentage, which is 16.4, and 
fourth in rank is the Russian group, 15.5 per cent of whose commit- 
ments were for offenses of personal violence. The other two immi- 
grant groups having larger percentages than the percentage belong- 
mg to persons native-born of native father are the German and 
Finnish, in both of which offenses of personal violence play a much 
smaller part than in the four immigrant groups first mentioned. The 
German percentage is 7.7 and the Finnish 7. Considerable less than 
that of any of these six groups is the proportion of commitments for 
offenses of personal violence of native-born offenders of native father, 
being 5.3 per cent. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 163 

Although six immigrant groups have highier percentages of com- 
mitments for offenses of personal violence than the group of persons 
^ native-bom of native father, not one of the five groups of American- 
^ bom children of immigrants has a higher percentage. This appears 
less remarkable, however, when it is observed that only one of these 
five groups (that of German descent) consists of persons whose 
fathers came from any of the countries of birth of the six immigrant 
groups above referred to (Italy, Austria-Hungary, Poland, Russia, 
Germany, and Finland). This is probably cmefiy due to the fact 
Vhat all of these nationaUties except the German are of comparatively 
recent immigration and thus have not large numbers of American- 
bom children of criminal age. But it is a striking fact that five of 
the six immigrant groups exhibiting greater relative frequency of 
offenses of personal violence than that shown bv the group of persons 
n.itive-bom of nonimmigrant parentage should come from countries 
w.liich are the sources of much of our recent immigration. 

The position of the groups of Irish and Scotch oirth, and of t^ose 
CO mposed of American-bom persons of Irish and Scotch parentage, 
is interesting. These four groups have smaller percentages than any 
others; the native-bom of Scotch parentage has the smallest of all, the 
foreign-bom Scotch the next, the foreign-bom Irish the third, and the 
native-bom of Irish parentage the fourth in ascending order. 

The relations of the native-bom groups of foreign parentage to the 
corresponding groups of foreign birth are rather unuke those shown 
by the figures of conunitments for the gainful offenses. The latter 
show, in the main, a greater relative frequency of commitments for 
offenses of personal violence among the groups of persons native-born 
of foreign father than among the correspondmg groups of the forei^- 
bom, four of the five native groups of foreign parentage (that of Irish 
parentage bein^ the exception) having smaller percentages than the 
corresponding unmigrant groups. 

Offenses against public poUcy caused a greater number of commit- 
ments to penal institutions in Massachusetts during the year ending 
September 30, 1909, than all other crimes combined, the number of 
such conmiitments being 22,099. 

These commitments form, as shown by the above table, over half 
of the total commitments of every nationaUty and parentage group, 
except that of Italian birth, of whose total commitments they com- 
prise 41.8 per cent. Of the offenses of persons of Irish birth. 90 per 
cent were against public poUcy; of those of persons bom in Sweden, 
86.5 per cent; of the crimes of immi^ants from Finland, 86.1 per 
cent; of the criminal acts of Scotch unmigrants, 85.6 per cent; of 
those of persons of English birth, 81.9 ner cent; and of the total 
criminality of persons emigrating from Canada, 76.2 per cent. In 
addition to these six inmiigrant groups, offenses against pubUc 
poUcy compose over 75 per cent of the crimes of American-born 
offenders of Irish, Scotch, and English parentage, their percentage 
of the first being 83.5 per cent, of the second, 78.2 per cent, and of 
the third, 75.6 per cent. Thus, in nine of the seventeen different 
nativity and parentage ^oups appearing in the table, more than three- 
fourths of the total cnmmality consists of acts * ^ against pubUc poUcy." 

Of the total commitments of the foreign-born from Ireland, they 
form the largest proportion, 90 per cent. Of those of the foreign-bom 
from Italy, they comprise* the smallest, 41.8 per cent. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



164 



The Iminigrati<Mi CommissiiMi* 



Six of the 11 imm^rant groups of offenders — those from Ireland, 
Sweden, Finland, Scotland, England, and Canada — and all of the fiv^e 
groups of native-born offenders of immigrant parentage have higher 
percentages of conmiitments for offenses against pubhc policy tnan 
the native-bom of noninmiigrant parentage. 

Of the inMnigrant groups, that of Irish birth has the largest per- 
centage, while of the .^nencan-bom groups, that of Irish parentage nas 
the largest. Next in rank to that of mmugrant offenders from Ireland 
are the percentages of those from Sweden and Finland, neither of 
which countries is represented in the parentage of the native-bom 
groups shown in the above table. After these, the percentage of the 
Scotch is next in order among the foreign-bom groups, white among 
the native-bom eroups that of Scotch parentage ranks second in order 
of percentage. Following that of the foreign-bom from Scotland is 
the percentage of the group of English birth among the imniigrant 
groups, while that of native-bom persons of English parentage is next 
amongthe native-bom groups to that of the group of Scotca parent- 
age. Turther than this, the percentage of offenders bom in Canada 
and those of Canadian parentage are respectiveljr next in rank among 
the inunigrant and nonimmigrant groups; while inunigrants from 
Germany and American-bom children of inmiiCTants from the same 
country respectively occupy the immediately following places among 
the foreign and native groups. 

A defmite order of relative frequency of commitments for these 
offenses against pubUc poUcy is thus f oimd among the different gTou|)8 
of immigrants and American-bom children of immigrants. This is 
J more clearly shown by the following table, in which the various groups 
of native- and foreign-bom offenders are arranged in parallel columns 
in descending order of their percentages of commitments for these 
offenses: 



InmiigrftDts. 


Natives. 


Country of birth. 


PeroeAt. 


Country of birth of lather. 


Percent. 


Irahoid TT , r 


gao 

86.5 
8&1 
85.6 
81.9 
76.2 
67.1 


Iff land 


83.5 


Sweden 


Rootland 


78.2 


Finland , . . . r 


England 


75u6 




Canada 


7a7 


England 


Q«nnany 


60.0 


Canada 






flomnmv 









It will be observed that each of the native-bom groups of foreign 
parentage, except that of German parentage, has a larger percentage 
than the corresponding immigrant group. 

During the year under consideration offenses against chastity 
caused fewer commitments than any of the three classes of crime 
already analyzed. Of the 28,330 commitments for all crimes, only 
765, or 2.7 per cent, were for offenses of this nature. 

Offenses against chastity are shown by Table 92 to have formed 
a far larger proportion of the crimes of immigrants from Italy, 11.1 
per cent, than of the crimes of any other group of iinmigraiits or 
of any group of native-bom persons. Next in rank is their pro- 
portion of the crimes of immigrant offenders from Canada, of wno8e 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



165 



total commitments 5 per cent were for offenses against chastity. 
Immediately following these two groups of offenders in relative fre- 
quency of onenses against chastity is the group of natiye-bom persons 
of native parentage, of whose total crimes these compose 3.8 per cent. 
Thus, only two groups of persons, and both of these of foreign birth, 
have larger {>ercentfi^es of offenses against chastity than the native- 
bom of nonimmigrant parentage. Of the crimes of foreign-bom 
persons from Finland they form the smallest proportion of all, only 1 of 
the 201 commitments of this group, or one-half of 1 per cent, having 
been for an "offense against chastity." 

QAINFUL OFFENSES. 

The several gainful offenses and the number of commitments for 
each are shown oy nativity and parentage of offenders in the following 
table: 



Tabls d3 . — Gainful offenses compared toith all offenses: Massachusetts penal instUuiions, 
October i, 1908, to September SO, 1909. 



NUMBER. 





AD of. 
fenses. 


Gainful offenses. 


Nativity and parentage. 


Burglary. 


Extor- 
tion. 


Forgery 

and 

fraud. 


Larceny 
and 

receiving 
stolen 
goods. 


Robbery. 


Total. 


Native-born of native fother 

Native-born of forelni fother, by 
oountry of birth offather: 
Oanaqa 


6,28B 

1,176 
529 
200 

7,278 
271 

227 

2,675 

1,086 

201 

155 

6,351 

450 

220 

573 

439 

281 


171 

43 
17 

6 
106 

6 

5 
35 

8 


1 


43 

1 
1 
1 

14 
2 


839 

171 
57 
27 

587 
25 

24 
253 
67 
8 
24 
243 
62 
24 
T7 
35 
12 


86 

5 
1 
2 
19 
5 

2 
7 

1 
1 
1 
5 
9 


1,090 
220 


Kpgte"'' 




76 


Gtrniany 




36 


Ireland 




726 


p<)otland 




88 


Forelgn-bom: 

Atistrla-Hnncary 




81 


CTanada 




is 

8 

2 
2 

8 
6 
2 
3 

1 
1 


808 


England 




78 


Finland 




11 


Gfnnany 


3 

26 
16 

7 
10 




80 


iT^tand 




282 


Italy 




98 


Poland 




88 


Russia 




5 

1 


05 


fff5>tl^M 




37 


Bwfiden 


3 




16 










Qfand total 


« 28,880 


498 


1 


112 


2,712 


118 


8,481 




Native-born of foreign fttther 


9,810 

M5,219 

13,101 


188 
372 
126 




25 
60 
43 


950 

1,836 

915 


44 

83 
35 


1,216 
2,361 
1,119 


Total native-born ..... 


1 









• iDotndes 10 oommltments of persons not reporting natlvltv. 
»Inotadei 131 oommltments of persons not reporting parentage. 



Digitized by 



Google 



166 



The Immigration G>mmi8sion. 



Table 9Z.— Gainful ofenm compared with all offenset: Ma$saehu$etU penal irutittUunu, 
October /, 1908, to September SO, 1909— CJontinued. 

PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSEa 



Nativity and poientage. 



All or- 



Oainfnl 



Burglary 



Extor- 
Uon. 



Forgery 

and 

fraud. 



Loroeny 
and 

reoeiving 
stolen 
goods. 



Robbery. 



TotaL 



Native-born of native father 

Native-bom of foreign fatlier, by 
ooimtry of birth oifather: 

Canada.^. , 

England 

Germany 

Ireland 

Scotland 

Foreign-born: 

Austria-Hungary , 

Canada , 

England 

Finland 

Germany 

Ireland 

Italy 

Poland 

Russia 

Scotland 

Sweden. 

G rand total 

Native-bom of foreign father 

Total native-bom. 

Foreign-bom. 



100.0 



100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 



3.2 



8.7 
3.2 
3.0 
1.6 
2.2 

2.1 
L3 

.8 

.0 
1.0 

.4 
3.6 
8.2 
1.7 

.0 
1.1 



(•) 



0.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 

.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 



as 



.1 

.2 
.6 
.2 
.7 

.0 

.6 

.2 

1.0 

L8 

.1 

L8 

.9 

.5 

.2 

.4 



1&9 



14.6 
10.8 
18.6 
8.1 
9.2 

10.1 
9.6 
6.6 
4.0 
16.6 
3.8 
18.8 
10.9 
13.4 
8.0 
4.8 



a7 



.4 
.2 

LO 
.8 

1.8 

.8 
.8 
.1 
.6 
.6 
.1 
2.0 
.0 
.9 
.2 
.0 



20.6 



18.7 
14.4 
18.0 

lao 

14.0 

18.1 
U.6 
7.5 
&5 
19.4 
4.4 
20.7 
15.0 
16.6 
8.4 
5.7 



100.0 



1.8 



(•) 



9.7 



12.3 



100.0 
100.0 
100.0 



1.9 
2.4 
1.0 



(•) 



9.8 

12.1 

7.0 



12.4 
15.5 
8.5 



a Less than 0.05 per cent 

Commitments for burglarj; (which include those for breaking and 
entering) number 498, of which 372 were of native-bom persons and 
126 of immigrants. 

This table shows two groups of offenders with higher percentages 
of commitments for this crime than the group composed of persons 
native-bom of native father. These two groups are the nativo-bom 
of Canadian parentage, whose 43 commitments for burglary form 3.7 
per cent of all their commitments, and the foreign-born from Italy, 
whose 16 cases of burglary compose 3.6 per cent of all their commit- 
ments. Furthermore, there are two other groups having percentages 
equaling that of the native-born of native father. These are the 
native-bom group of English parentage and the immigrant group 
from Poland. 

Two groups of offenders have no commitments for burglary. 
Both of these are immigrant groups — those from Finland and Scot- 
land. Although persons of Irish birth have 26 commitments for 
burglary, their percentage, which is only 0.4, is less than one-half that 
of any other group having burglary among its offenses. 

Every native-born group of foreign parentage hasa larger percentage 
of commitments for burglary than the corresponding foreign-bora 
group. Even persons of German birth, whose percentage of me total 
gainful offenses and of the selected crimes of larceny and receiving 
stolen property are greater than those of native-born persons of 
German parentage, show a smaller percentage of burglary than the 
. latter. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 167 

Only 112 commitments were made for forgery and fraud, yet of the 
eleven groups of persons shown in the table, the Austro-Hi^ngarian is 
the only one havmg no commitments for these offenses. The largest 

aortions are found in the immigrant groups from Germany and 
y, each of which has 1.3 per cent. Second in rank is the per- 
centage of the immigrant group from Finland. These three groups 
and the immigrant Polish group are the only ones having larger pro- 
portions than the group native-bom of native father, 0.8 per cent of 
whose commitments were for these crimes. 

The largest nmnber of conmiitments for any of the gainful offenses 
was for the crimes of larceny and receiving stolen property, which 
have here been grouped together, as in other sections of this report. 
Of the 3,481 commitments for all gainful offenses, 2,752 were for 
these crimes. . 

No group of offenders has so large a proportion of commitments 
for the crimes of larceny and receiving stolen property as that which 
consists of persons native-bom of native father. There is little dif- 
ference, however, between the percentage of this group and that of 
the foreign-bom from Germany or that of the native-bom of Canadian 

i)arentage, the percentage of the former being 15.9 and of the two 
atter 15.5 and 14.5, respectively. As in the case of the total gainful 
offenses, the smallest percentage is found to be that of persons bom 
in Ireland, of whose total conmutments those for larceny and receiving 
stolen property form only 3.8 per cent. 

The Italian-bom, whose percentage of the total gainful offenses 
exceeds that of all other groups, have but 13.8 per cent of their 
commitments for the crimes of larceny and receiving stolen property, 
thus being exceeded in relative frequency of these crimes by the 
native-born of native father, the foreign-bom from Germany, and 
the native-bom of Canadian parentage. 

A relation of native-bom groups of foreign parentage to corre- 
sponding foreign-bom groups similar to that found in the figures of 
the aggregate gainful offenses exists in regard to larceny and receiving 
stolen property. Each of the five groups of foreign parentage and 
native birth except that of German descent has a larger percentage 
than the corresponding immigrant group. 

For robbery only 118 commitments are recorded, 83 of which are 
of American-bom persons and 35 of immigrants. Of these, 36 are 
commitments of native-bom persons of native parentage. Thus, as 
is shown in Table 93, the percentage of commitments for robbery is 
greater among offenders of native birth, being 0.5 per cent, than 
among those of foreign birth, which is only 0.3 per cent, and greater 
among the native-bom of native parentage, where it is 0.7 per cent, 
than among the native-bom of foreign parentage, whose percentage 
is. 0.4 or the foreign-bom, of whose total . commitments those for 
robbery form only 0.3 per cent. Yet three groups of the foreign- 
bom and two of the native-born of foreign parentage exceed the 
American-bom of native father in relative frequency of commit- 
ments for robbery. The three foreign-bom groups are those from 
Italy, Russia, and Austria-Hungary, of whose total commitments 
those for robbery form, respectively, 2, 0.9 and 0.8 per cent. The 
two native-bom groups of foreign parentage are those of Scotch and 
of German parentage, in the first oi which robbery comprises 1.8 per 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



168 



Tlie Immigration Commission. 



cent of the total crimes, and in the latter 1 per cent. Of the native- 
bom of native father, as previously stated, the percentage is only 0.7 per 
cent. Of all groups of offenders that of Italian birth has the highest 
percentage, it beiiig nearly three times that of the native-bom of 
native parentage. Two groups of immigrant offenders have no 
commitments for robbery — those from Poland and Sweden. Foyr 
others have but one each — the groups of English, Finnish, German, 
and Scotch birth. Of the native-bom groups, each has at least one 
commitment for robbery, although the group of English parentage 
has but one and that of German parentage out two. In the case, 
however, of offenders of German descent, these two commitments 
form 1 per cent of their total commitments, a larger percentage than 
that of any other group except the immigrant ItaUan group and the 
group composed of persons American-bom of Scotch parentage. 

OFFBNSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENOB. 

Commitments for the various offenses of personal violence are 
shown by nativity and parentage groups in Table 94. 

Table 94. — Offenaes of personal violence compeared with all offenses: Massachusetts penal 
instxttUions, October i, 1908, to September 30, 1909, 

NUMBER. 





AU 
offenses. 


Offenses of personal violenoe. 


Nativity and parentage. 


Simple 
assault. 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


Total. 


Native-born of native ftither 


5,288 

1,176 
529 
200 

7,278 
271 

237 

2,«75 

1,036 

201 

155 

6,351 

460 

220 

573 

430 

281 


249 

48 
23 

8 
247 

3 

37 
121 
51 
14 
11 
142 
56 
28 
80 
11 
12 


12 

3 


11 

1 


6 


S7S 


Native-bom of foreign fatlier, by country of 
birth of father: 
nfmnd^ I 


52 


England 




33 


Germany 








8 


Ireland 


8 

1 

16 
5 
3 


5 




280 


Sootland .... ........ 




4 


For^gn-bom: 

Aiistria-Himgary 


1 
7 




54 


Canada 7.. I 


1 
1 


134 


England x x x 


55 


Fimand 




14 


Oermany 




1 
2 
23 




It 


Ireland.. 


45 
26 
8 
9 
1 
1 




189 


Italy 


3 


lOB 


Poland 


36 


Russia 






80 


Scottand 






u 


Sweden 






13 










Grand total 


a28.380 


1,218 


154 


56 


12 


1.440 




Native-bom of foreign fother 


9.810 

» 15.219 

13,101 


852 
602 
616 


17 
29 
126 


8 
19 
87 


1 
7 
6 


178 


Total native-bom 


657 


Foreign-bom 


783 







alndndes 10 commitments of persons not reporting nativttv. 
tlndud e s 121 oommitmeats of persons not reporting parennflU 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



169 



Table 94. — OffeMtM of personal violence compared vjilh all ajfenses: MassachusetU penal 
institutions, October 1, 1908, to September SOy i909— Continued. 

PBR CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 





AU 
offenses. 


Offenses of personal violence. 


Nativity and parentage. 


Simple 
assault. 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


Total. 


NatiTe-bom of nattve father *. 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100. 
100.0 


4.7 

4.1 
4.3 
4.0 
8.4 
1.1 

16.6 
4.5 
4.9 
7.0 
7.1 
2.2 
12.4 
12.7 
14.0 
2.5 
4.3 


0.23 

.26 

.0 

.0 

.11 

.37 

6.75 

.19 

.29 

.0 

.0 

.71 

5.78 

3.64 

1.67 

.23 

.36 


0.21 

.09 

.0 

.0 

.07 

.0 

.42 
.26 
.0 
.0 
.66 
.03 
5.11 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 


0.11 

.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 

.0 

.04 

.10 

.0 

.0 

.0 

.66 

.0 

.0 

.0 

.0 


6.8 


Native-boni of foreign father, by country of 
birth of father; "^ ' ^ 
Canada 


4.4 


En^and 


4.3 


Germany 


4.0 


Ireland.. 


3.6 


Scotland 


1.6 


Foralgn4M>m: 

Austrla-Htuurarr 


22.8 


oSSaiv.^T/....... .:::::. ::::::: 


6.0 


England 


6.3 


rfnlMid 


7.0 


Qermany 


7.7 


Trtlwidx. 


3.0 


Italy 


24.0 


F^uid....... ... 


16.4 


Russia 


15.6 


Scotland 


2.7 


Sweden 


4.6 






Grand total 


100.0 


4.8 


.64 


.20 


.04 


6.1 








100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


3.6 
4.0 
4.7 


.17 
.19 
.96 


.08 
.13 
.28 


.01 
.05 
.04 


8.9 


Total natiTe-bom..T 


4.8 


Fnrnigp.b<^ni 


6.0 







During the period under investigation a larger number of commit- 
ments were made for simple assault than for any other offense of per- 
sonal violence. Of the 1,440 commitments for all offenses of personal 
violence, 1,218, or 84.6 per cent, were for this crime. 

Simple assault, as shown by tne foregoing table, forms a larger pro- 
portion of the crimes of seven of the immigrant groups of onenders 
than it does of the crimes of native-bom offenders of native parentage. 
These seven immigrant groups are those from Austria-Hungary, 15.6 
per cent; Russia, 14 per cent; Poland, 12.7 per cent; Italy, 12.4 per 
cent; Germany, 7.1 per cent; Finland, 7 per cent; England, 4.9 per 
cent. 

Of the total commitments of native-bom persons of native par- 
entage, those for simple assault form 4.7 per cent, a larger percentage 
than such commitments form of the total commitments of any group 
of native-bom offenders of foreign parentage. 

Thus the relative frequency of simple assault is greater among 
offenders' of Austro-Hungarian birth than among those of any other 
foreign nativity or anjr group of native birth. Among persons of 
Scotch parentage born in the United States it is least, only 3 of the 
271 commitments of this group, or 1.1 per cent, being for tms offense. 

As the aggregate offenses of personal violence form a smaller pro- 
portion of the crimes of every group of native-bom offenders of for- 
eign parentage than of those of native-born offenders of native par- 
en t^e, so the selected crime of simple assault forms a smaller propor- 
tion. Moreover, in only two of the foreign-bom groups (those from 
Scotland and Ireland) is the percentage of commitments for simple 

78340'— VOL 36—11 12 



Digitized by 



Google 



170 The Immigration Commission. 

assaxilt smaller than in any native-born ffroup of foreign parentage. 
Of the total commitments of persons of Swedish birth it is the same 
as of those of native-born oflTenders of English parentage; but with 
this exception the Scotch and Irish are the only immigrant groups 
whose relative frequency of this crime is not in excess of that of 
every native-bom group of immigrant parentage. 

For the crime of violent assault there were 154 conunitments dur- 
ing the year ending September 30, 1909, or only about one-half of 
1 per cent of the total number of commitments for all offenses. Yet 
of the commitments of immigrants from Austria-Hungary 6.75 per 
cent were for this offense, and of the commitments of immigrants 
from Italy 5.78 per cent. The relative frequency of violent assault 
among the offenses of these two immigrant groups is considerably 

freater than among the offenses of any other group of offenders, 
n only two other groups — the Polish and Russian — is the propor- 
tion equal to 1 per cent. It is striking that the four nationahties 
just enumerated — the Austro-Hungarian, ItaUan, Polish, and Rus- 
sian — should exceed aU others in relative frequency of commitments 
not only for violent assault, but for simple assault as well. 

Seven immigrant groups and two second-generation groups exceed 
the native-bom of native father in propoition of conunitments for 
violent assault. The immigrant groups are the Austro-Hungarian, 
ItaUan, Polish, Russian, Irish, Swedish, and English: the second- 
generation groups, the Scotch and Canadian. Two of the immigrant 
groups and two of the second-generation groups shown in the table 
had no commitments for violent assault— foreign-born persons from 
Finland and Germany and American-bom persons wnose fathers 
came from England and Germany. 

Of the 17 groups of offenders shown in the table only 8 (or less 
than one-half) had any commitments for homicide. The total number 
of commitments for bliis crime was 56, of which 23 were the commit- 
ments of Italians. These 23 commitments form 5.11 per cent of all 
commitments of this nationality, or a far larger proportion than is 
found in any other group of offenders. Next in rank are the Ger- 
mans, whose percentage is only 0.65, or scarcely more than one- 
eighth that of the Italians. Besides the Italians and Germans, the 
Austro-Hungarians and the Canadians exceed the native-bom of native 
father in relative frequency of commitments for homicide. Although 
there were 11 commitments of persons American-bom of native 
parentage for this crime, they comprised only 0.21 per cent of the 
total commitments of the group. 

Rape caused only 12 commitments- 3 of these were commitments 
of Italians, forming 0.66 per cent of all Italian commitments; 6 were 
of persons native-bom or native parentage, forming 0.11 per cent of 
the total commitments of that group, while 1 commitment was of a 
person of Canadian birth, 1 of a person of EngUsh birth, and 1 of a 
person bom in the United States of foreign father. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



171 



OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY. 

In the following table is shown the distribution of commitments 
for the various offenses against public policy: 

Tablb 95. — Offenses against public poUey compared vnth all offenses: liassackuseUs 
penal institutions, October 1, 1908, to September SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 





AH 
offenses. 




Nativity and parent- 
age. 


Disor- 

dcrly 

conduct 


Drunk- 
enness. 


Gaming. 


Offenses 
of vio- 
lence. 


Var 
grancy. 


AU 
Other. 


TotaL 


Native-bom of native 
fother 


6,288 

1,176 
629 
200 

7,278 

2n 

237 

2,676 

1,036 

201 

166 

6,361 

450 

220 

673 

439 

281 


131 

89 
11 

1 

157 

8 

13 
126 
46 
12 


2,828 

656 
320 
102 
6,472 
179 

101 
1,723 
714 
149 
73 

113 
216 
326 
211 


23 

1 
3 
1 
16 


32 

9 
4 


231 

49 
37 
20 
226 
16 

16 
77 
45 

6 
11 
161 

7 

12 
21 
16 
20 


363 

78 
26 
14 
186 
10 

13 
102 
43 

4 
16 
129 
47 

9 
72 
10 

8 


3,608 

831 
400 
138 


Native-bom of Ibreign 
father, by country of 
birth of 4ther: 
Canada 


England 


Germany..... . .. . . . 


Ireland 


17 


6,074 
212 


Scotland 


Foreign-bora: 

Austria-Hungary. . . 
Canada 


1 
1 


3 
9 


146 

2,038 

848 


England ..,,..,.,-, 


Finland. . 




3 
6 
18 
63 
6 
14 
3 
4 


173 


Germany 




104 


Ireland 


173 
14 
6 
29 
21 


3 
6 

1 
6 


6,718 
188 


Italy 


Poland 


147 


Russia 


367 


Scotland 


376 


Sweden 




243 










Grand total 


• 28,330 


812 


18.790 


78 


197 


1,003 


1,219 


22,099 


Native-bom of foreign 
fother 


0,810 

» 15, 219 

18,101 


232 
866 
446 


6,833 
9,698 
9,083 


23 
46 
32 


37 
70 
127 


867 
698 
406 


863 

716 
604 


7,881 
11,493 
10,607 


Total native-bom 





PER GENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Native-bom of native 
fether 


100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


2.6 

8.3 
2.1 
.6 
2.2 
3.0 

5.5 
4.7 
4.4 
6.0 

.0 
2.7 
3.1 
2.7 
5.1 
4.8 

.0 


53.5 

66w7 
60.5 
61.0 
75.2 
66.1 

42.6 
64.4 
68.9 
74.1 
47.1 
82.4 
13.6 
51.4 
37.5 
74.3 
76.1 


0.4 

.09 
.06 
.60 
.22 
.0 

.42 

.04 

.0 

.0 

.0 

.05 

1.33 
.45 

1.06 
.0 
.0 


0.6 

.8 
.8 
.0 
.2 
.0 

1.3 

.3 

.0 

1.6 

3.2 

.3 

11.8 

2.7 

2.4 

.7 

1.4 


4.4 

4.2 

7.0 
10.0 
3.1 
6.6 

6.3 
2.9 
4.3 
2.5 
7.1 
2.5 
1.6 
6.5 
3.7 
3.6 
7.1 




68.0 

7a7 
76.6 
60.0 
83.6 

78.2 


Native-bom of foreign 
father, bv country of 
birth of father: 
Canada. . . . r . , . . . r r . 








Oefmany 




Ireland 




Scotland 




Foreign-bom: 

Austria-Hungary. . . 




61.6 


Canada. . . . . r . , . 




76 2 


England 




81 9 


Fliifand. ....rr..- 




86.1 
67 1 


G^nmany.... ....... 




Ireland.: 




90.0 


Italy 




41 8 


Poland 




66.8 


Russia 




62.3 
85.6 


Scotland 




Sweden 




86.6 








Grand total 


100.0 


2.9 


66.3 


.27 


.7 


3.6 




78.0 








Native-bom of foreign 
father 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


2.4 
2.4 
3.4 


60.6 
63.7 
60.3 


.23 
.80 
.24 


.4 

.6 
1.0 


3.6 
3.9 
3.1 




70.0 
76.6 


Total natlve-bom 








80 









• Includes 10 commitments of persons not reporting nativity. 
b Includes 121 commitments or persons not reporting parenniftu 



Digitized by 



Google 



172 



The Immigration Commission. 



Turning to the figures showing commitments for drunkenness 
which are given in Table 96, it is found that 82.4 per cent of all 
commitments of persons bom in Ireland were of this character 
and 75.2 per cent of all those of native-bom persons of Irish parent- 
age. Not only does drunkenness form a larger proportion of the 
offenses of Irish-bom persons than of those of any other immigrant 
group, and of the offenses of native-bom children of inunigrants 
from Ireland than of those of any other group of nonimmigrant per- 
sons, but these two, groups have higher percentages of conmiitments 
for this offense than any other group, immigrant or native. 

Ten groups of offenders, six composed of immigrants and four of 
American-bom children of immigrant fathers, haveliigher percentages 
than the native-bom of American parentage. These ten groups are, 
in order of percentage, as follows: 



InuxUgrents. 


Peroent. 


American-born of immigrant father. 


Percent 


Country of birth: 


82.4 
75.1 
74.3 
74.1 
68.0 
64.4 


Coontnr of birth of lather: 

Mand , ........ 


7S.2 


Sweden . 


Scotland 


#9 1 


Scotland 


Knriand t ......... r ............... . 


60.5 


Finland 


Canada 


55.7 


England 






Canada 









The percentage of native-bom of native father is 53.5. 

Of tne total commitments of all but four of the 17 groups of 
offenders, commitments for drunkenness form over 50 per cent. 
These four exceptions are all immi^ant groups — of Austro-Hunga- 
rian, German, Italian, and Russian birth. Of these, the Italian is the 
only group having less than one-third of all its conmiitments of this 
character. The Italian percentage, only 13.6 per cent, is the smallest 
percentage of all the groups of native and immigrant offenders, and 
IS so low, in comparison with all others, as to set the Italian immi- 
grants strikingly apart. 

Of the native-born children of immigrants, each group, with the 
exception of that of German parentage, has a sm^er percentage of 
dnmkenness than the immigrant group from the country of their 
fathers. As these five immigrant groups, with the exception of that 
of German birth, and all of the native-bom groups of immigrant 
parentage, without exception, have larger percentages than the native- 
born of native parentage, this results in making the percentage of 
each of the American-bom groups of immigrant's children differ 
from the percentage of the corresponding group of immigrant offend- 
ers, such difference tending toward the group native-bom of nonimmi- 
grant parentage. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 173 

This is more clearly shown by the following rearrangement of the 
groups in question: 

Table 96. — Pa: cent distnbutum of commitments for drunkenness among total commit' 
mentSy by naHvity and descent of offender: MassachtiseUs penal institutions, October i, 
1908, to September SO, 1909. 



NfitiTlty and deaoent 



Percent 



Native-bom of native father. 



Inuniflant 

Second nneratkn.. 

iinmigrant 

Second generation. 
German: 

Immigrant 

Second generation. 
Irish: 

Inuniflant 

Second generation. . 
Scotch: 

Inuniflant 

Second generation. 



03.5 



644 



6&9 
6a6 



47.1 
51.0 



82.4 

7&2 



74.8 
6&1 



One other of the offenses against public policy appears worthy of 
special analysis — that of vagrancy. 

The group of oflFenders having the largest percentage of commit- 
ments for tnis oflFense is of native birth, although of foreign parent- 
age — that group composed of persons bom in the United States 
whose fathers came from Germany. Of their total commitments, 
10 per cent were for vagrancy. Strongly contrasted with this group 
is that of foreign-bom offenders from Italy, of whose 450 commit- 
ments for all offenses only 7, or 1.6 per cent, were for this offense, a 
less proportion than that of any other group, either native or foreign. 

Seven of the 16 groups of immigrants and immigrants' children 
exceed the native-lK)m of native parentage in their percentage of 
commitments for vagrancy. Four of these 7 are groups of foreign- 
bom offenders, wlme three are groups of native-bom offenders 
of foreign parentage. The foreim-bom are from Germany, 
Sweden, Austria-Hungary, and Poland. The native-bom are of 
German, English, and Scotch parentage. It will be noted that 
although 3 groups of native-bom chudren of immigrants have 

J>ercentages higher than the group of persons native-bom of native 
ather, only one corresponding immigrant group (that of German 
birth) is foimd among tne 4 groups of foreign-bom offenders also 
having higher percentages. 

The preceding table also shows that each group of native-bom offend- 
ers of foreign parentage has a higher percentage of commitments for 
vagrancy t£an the corresponding group of foreigu-bom offenders. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



174 



The Immigration Commission. 



OFFENSES AGAINST OHASTITT. 

From the offenses against chastity, crimes of prostitution are 
selected from analysis. These, together with all other offenses 
against chastity, are shown in. the following table: 

Tablb 97.^0ffen$e$ against chastity compared with all offenses: Massadmsetts penal 
institutions, October 1, 1908, to September SO, 1909. 

NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 




Nativity and parentage. 


Crimes of 
prostitu- 
tion 


ADottier. 


Total 


Natiye-bora of native &ther 


6,288 

1,176 
629 
200 

7,278 
271 

237 
2,675 

201 
166 
6,351 
460 
220 
673 
430 
281 


41 

7 

S 
1 
13 

1 

1 

34 
12 


102 

36 
9 

4 

100 

8 

9 
100 

17 
1 
6 

62 

86 
2 

10 
7 
6 


208 


Native-born of foreign father, by country of birth of 
father: 
Canada... 


41 


England u . ^ .. x 


13 


Oemaany... 


5 


Ireland 


113 


Scotland 


9 


Foreign-bom: 

Austria-Hnogary. ............. ^.....^ a........... 


8 


Canada . " ' 


134 


Englftn^ , , „ - 


29 


FlSaud 


1 


Germany 




6 


Ireland 


8 
16 

1 
7 

1 


70 


Italy 


60 


Poland 


3 


Roasia 


17 


Scotland 


8 


Sweden 


5 








Grand total 


028,330 


166 


609 


766 






Native-bom of foreign lather 


9,810 

» 16, 219 

13,101 


83 
74 
82 


165 
831 
278 


196 


Total native-bom . .'i ... u a... .^*** .** * 


406 


Foreign-born 


300 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSEa 





loao 

100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 


• 6 

1.'8 
1.3 

il 

l!3 




8.8 


Native-bom of foreign father by country of birth of 
father: 
Canada 




3.7 


England 




3L3 


Gflfmany 




2.5 


Ireland. ." 




1.6 


Scotiand 




3.S 


Foreign-bom: 

Austria-Hungary 




1.3 


Canada 




b.0 


Fngland .....^.. ... . .. 




2.8 


Finland 




.5 


Germany 




3L2 


Ireland 




LI 


Italy 




11.1 


Poland 




1.4 


Russia 




ao 


Scotland 




L8 


Sweden 




1.8 








Grand total 


loao 


.6 




27 








Native4>ora of foreign father 


loao 
loao 
loao 


!6 




10 


Total native-bom 




27 


Foreign-bom 




27 









• Includes 10 commitments of persons not reporting nativity. 
b Includes 121 commitments of persons not reporting parentafs. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime* 



175 



Commitments for crimes of prostitution are foimd in all the groups 
of American birth and in all of the immigrant groups except three — 
the Finnish, German, and Swedish. Eadi of the groups native-bom 
of foreign father has a smaller proportion of such conunitments than 
the group native-bom of native father, of whose total conmiitments 
for ail offenses, 41, or 0.8 per cent, were of this character. Four of 
the immigrant groups, however, exceed the native-bom of native 
father in proportion. These are the groups coming from Italy, 3.3 
per cent; Canada, 1.3 per cent; Russia, 1.2 per cent; England, 1.2 
per cent. Those groups from Austria-Hungaiy, Ireland, Poland, and 
Scotland have smaller proportions than the American-bom of native 
father, while those from Fmland, Germany, and Sweden have no com- 
mitments for crimes of prostitution recorded against them. 

SUMMABY. 

In these records of the Massachusetts penal institutions the several 
gainful offenses are more prominent amon^ the crimes of the American- 
Bom of native father than among the cnmes of the majority of the 
immigrant and second-generation groups, as shown in the following 
table: 



Table 9B, ^Relative frequency of gainful offenses: Massachusetts penal institutions 
October 1, 1908, to September SO, 1909. • 


Nativity and parentage. 


AU gainful 
oflenaes. 


Burglary. 


Forgery and 
fraud. 


Larceny and 

receiving 
stolen goods. 


Robbery. 




Rank. 


Per 
oent 


Rank. 


Per 
oent 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
oent. 


Native-born of nattTe tether 

NaUve-bom of Ibreim father, by 
ootmtry of birth of tether: 
Oansuia 


2 

4 
8 
6 
12 


10 
11 
14 
16 
3 
17 
1 
7 
6 
13 
15 


2a6 

la? 

14.4 
18.0 
10.0 
14.0 

13.1 
11.5 
7.5 
6.5 
19.4 
4.4 
20.7 
15.0 
16.6 
8.4 
6.7 


8 

1 
3 
4 

5 

6 
10 
12 

7* 

13 
2 
3 
8 
....... 


3.2 

3.7 
3.2 
3.0 
1.5 
2.2 

2.1 
1.3 

.8 

.0 
1.9 

.4 
3.6 
3.2 
1.7 

.0 
1.1 


4 

9 
8 
6 
8 
5 

6* 

8 
2 

1 
9 
1 
3 
6 

f 


0.8 

.1 
.2 
.5 

.2 
.7 

.0 

.6 

.2 

1.0 

L8 

.1 

1.3 

.9 

.5 

.2 

.4 


1 

8 
8 
6 
12 
11 

9 
10 
14 

16 
2 

17 
4 
7 
6 

13 

16 


16.9 

14.5 
10.8 
13.5 
8.1 
9.2 

10.1 
9.6 
6.6 
4.0 
16.5 
8.8 
13.8 
10.9 
18.4 
8.0 
4.3 




9 
11 

3 
10 

2 

5 
10 
12 

8 

7 
12 

1 

4* 

11 


a? 

.4 


Kneland ....................... 


.2 


Qcrmany 


LO 


Tr^l^nd 


.8 


Scotland 


1.8 


Foreign-bom: 


.8 


Canada 7..' 


.3 


Endand 


.1 


Ftnkmd. 


.6 


Offrmany 


.6 


Ii^and/. 


.1 


Italy 


2.0 


Potend 


.0 


Rmslan 


.9 


f^fland 


.2 


Sweden 


•0 







Larceny occupies a larger place in the criminaUty of the native- 
bom of native rather than in that of any other group of offenders, 
while only two groups exceed in percentage of commitments for 
burglary, four in percentage of commitments for forgery and fraud, 
and five in percentage of conunitments for robbery. The ItaUan 
inmaigrant group has a larger percentage of commitments for bur- 
glary, the furnish, German, Italian, and Polish immigrant groups of 
those for forgery and fraud, and the Austro-Hungarian, Italian, and 
Russian immigrant groups of those for robbery. Of the second- 
generation groups, the Canadian exceeds the native-bom of native 



Digitized by 



Google 



176 



The Immigration Commission* 



father in relative frequency of burglary, and the German, and Scotch 
exceed the native-bom of native fathers in relative frequency of 
robbery. 

A different condition exists with regard to the offenses of personal 
violence. 

Table 99. — Relative frequency of offeneee of personal violence: MoBmukuietU penal 
instituiums, October 1, 2908, to September SO, 1909, 



Nativity and parentage. 


AU offenses 

of personal 

violence. 


Assault, sim- 
ple. 


Assault, vio- 
lent 


Homicide. 


Bape. 




Rank. 


Per 
cent 


Rank. 


Per 
cent. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent 


Rank. 


Per 
oedt 


Rank. 


Per 

OSBU 


Native-born of native father. 

Native-bom of foreim lather, by 
coontry of birth of lather. 
Canada 


7 

10 
11 
12 
18 
16 

3 
8 
7 
6 
6 

14 
1 
8 
4 

15 



5.8 

4.4 

4.8 
4.0 
8.6 
1.6 

22.8 
6.0 
5.8 
7.0 
7.7 
3.0 
24.0 
16.4 
16.6 
2.7 
4.6 


8 

11 
10 
12 
18 
16 

1 

7 
6 
6 
15 
4 
3 
2 
14 
10 


4.7 

4.1 
4.8 
4.0 
3.4 
1.1 

15.6 
4.5 
4.0 
7.0 
7.1 
2.2 
12.4 
12.7 
14.0 
2.5 
4.3 


10 


""u 

6 

1 
11 
8 

6* 

2 
8 

4 
10 
7 


a28 

.26 
.00 
.00 
.11 
.87 

6.75 
.10 
.29 
.00 

:» 

&78 
8.64 
L57 
.23 
.86 


5 

6 

7* 

8 
4 

2* 

8 
1 


a21 

.00 
.00 
.00 
.07 
.00 

.42 
.26 
.00 
.00 
.66 
.03 
&11 
.00 
.00 
.00 
.00 


3 

4* 

8 

i* 


0.11 
.00 


EniEland 


.09 


Oennanv.. 


.00 


SSiSd!:;;::::;:;;;;::::;;;:;; 


.00 


Scotland 


.00 


Foreign-bom: 

Aastrla-Hiingary 


.00 


Canada 


.04 




.10 


Fta^Hid 


09 


Qermanv % 


.00 


Ireland.. 


oo 


Italy 


66 


Polnnd 


00 


Russia 


00 


Scotland 


00 


Sweden 


00 







None of these offenses forms so large a percentage of the crimes of 
the native-bom of native father as of those of some immigrant group, 
although they are in the main relatively more common among native 
offenders of native parentage than among native offenders of immi- 
grant parentage. The only exception to Uiis latter statement is with 
respect to violent assault, which is relatively more frequent among 
American-bom offenders of Canadian and Scotch parentage than 
among those of American parentage. 

Of the immigrant groups the Austro-Hungarian and the Italian 
are most notable for the hi^h relative frequency of these offenses 
amon^ them. Simple and violent assault form larger percentages of 
the crimes of Austrb-Hun^arian offenders than of those of any other 
group, while homicide and rape form larger percentages of the crimes 
of Italian offenders than of the crimes of any other group. 

Offenses against public policjr belong much more largely to immi- 
grant criminaUty than to the criminaUty of the native-bom of native 
parentage. Disorderly conduct and dmnkenness are shown by the 
table following to belong especially to immigrant criminality. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigjation and Crime. 



177 



Tablb l6b,^Relative frejuenq/ of offensei against public policy: Mas$achju€U8 penal 
instUtUuma, October 1, 1908, to Septeniber SO, 1909. 



NatiTHy and parent- 


AUoftensee 
against pab- 
lic policy. 


Disorderly 
oondnot. 


Dnmken- 
nesB. 


Gaming. 


Offenses of 
violenoe. 


Vagrancy. 


age. 


Rank. 


Per 
cent 


Bank. 


Per 
cent. 


R*nV 


Per 
cent. 


R*nV 


Per 
cent. 


Bank. 


Per 
cent. 


Itimlr 


Per 








cent 


Natire-bom of native 
tether .; 

NaUye-bom of for- 
eign Catber by ootm- 
^ of birth of 

Canaia 


12 

10 


11 
6 

7 

16 
8 
6 
3 
13 
1 

17 
14 
15 
4 
3 


68.0 

7a7 
7&6 
69.0 
83.5 
7a2 

6L6 
76.2 
81.0 
8&1 
67.1 
00.0 
41.8 
66.8 
62.3 
85.0 
86.5 


U 

7 
13 
14 
12 



2 
5 
6 

1 

8 
10 
8 

4 


^5 

3.8 
2.1 
.5 
2.2 
3.0 

5.5 
4.7 
4.4 
6.0 

.0 
2.7 
3.1 
2.7 
&1 
4.8 

.0 


U 

10 


13 
2 
7 

15 
8 
6 
5 
14 
1 

17 
12 
16 
4 
3 


53.5 

55.7 
60.5 
51.0 
75.2 
66.1 

42.6 
64.4 
68.9 
74.1 
47.1 
82.4 
13.6 
51.4 
37.5 
74.3 
75.1 


6 

8 

3 

7 

5 
11 

....... 

1 

4 
2 


0.40 

.00 
.06 
.80 
.22 
.00 

.42 
.04 
.00 
.00 
.00 
.06 

1.33 
.45 

1.05 
.00 
.00 


10 

U 
11 


0.6 

.8 
.8 
.0 
.2 
.0 

1.8 

.3 

.0 

L5 

3.2 

.3 

11.8 

2.7 

3.4 

.7 

1.4 


6 

8 
8 
1 

11 
i 

4 
- 13 

7 
13 

2 
13 
14 

5 


10 

3 


4.4 

4.2 


England 


7.0 


Qermany... 

Tr^land 


10.0 
3.1 


Scotland 


5.5 


FoiclgD-bOfB: 

Anatrla-Hungary 
Canada 


6.3 
2.0 


England 


4.3 


intilAn^ 


2.5 


Oeimany 


7.1 
2.5 


Italy 


1.6 


Poland 


5.5 


BiMBla 


3.7 


8ootlAnd. 


3.6 


8wM«n.. 


7.1 







Every immigrant group has a larger percentage of commitments 
for disorderly conduct than the native-born of native father, and six 
of the eleven immigrant groups have larger percentages of commit- 
ments for drunkenness. The Irish immigrant group is notable for 
its lai^e percentage of commitments for drunkenness, these forming 
over four-fifths of all commitments of immigrant offenders from Ire- 
land. In connection with this it is notable that the American-bom 
children of Irish fathers have a larger percentage of commitments for 
drunkenness than anv group except the Irish immigrants themselves. 

Offenses against chastity are relatively more frequent among the 
offenders of only two immigrant groups than among the native-bom 
of native father. 



Digitized by 



Google 



178 



The ImmigraticHi Commission. 



Tablb 101. — Relative frequency ofoffentes againat chastity: MassaehuseUs perud inatitU' 
hons, October 1, 1908, to September SO, 1909, 



Natiyity ftod parentage. 


AUoffenM against 
chastity. 


Crimes of prostttn- 
tSon. 




Rank. 


Percent. 


Rank. 


Percent. 


Natiye-born of native tether 


3 

4 

10 


13 
« 

14 
2 
8 

16 
6 

15 
1 

18 
7 

11 

11 


3.8 

3.7 
2.8 
2.5 
1.6 
8.8 

L8 
5.0 
3.8 
.5 
3.2 
1.1 
11.1 
1.4 
8.0 
1.8 
1.8 


4 

5 
5 
6 
8 
7 

7 
3 
8 


as 


Natiye-born of foreign father, by ooontry of birth of tethen 
Canada ,,„,.,,- 




Bnffland 




Oermany 




Ireland.'. 




Scotland ,.,,.. 




Poreign-bom: 

Atiatria-Hnngary 




Canada 


L3 


England ,-..",,-.,,,,.,,,.-.,, ,.,..,,.,,, 


L2 


Finland 




Germany ,...,,.... 






Ti^land 



1 
6 
8 
8 




Italy 


3.3 


Poland 




Buflsia 


1.2 


Bootland 




Sweden 


Q 









Grimes of prostitution form larger percentages of the total offenses 
of four immigrant groups than of those of the native group of non- 
immi^ant parentage. These immigrant groups are the Canadian, 
English, ItaUan, and Russian. Of the second-g^eneration groups, 
however, none has so lar^e a percentage of commitments for crimes 
of prostitution as the native-born of native father* 



Digitized by 



Google 



Chapter XI. 
AUEN CRTMTNATJTY. 



1. Alien Prisoners in the United States in 1908. 

In 1904, and again in 1908, the Bureau of Immigration and Natu- 
ralization made a canvass of all penal institutions in the United 
States for the purpose of discovering the number of alien prisoners 
detained therein. The general results of these enumerations are to 
be found in the reports of the Commissioner-General of Inunigration 
for these two years. But as complete tabulation of the data collected 
was not made, these statements of the results are only general. 

The value of more complete tabulation of the data appeared great 
enough to warrant the Inmiigration Commission in making it. 
Through the courtesy of the Bureau of Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion the original schedules o£ the 1908 enumeration were obtained. 
From these, new tables were compiled by the tabulating force of the 
Commission. Tabulation has been made of the number of alien 
prisoners of each race by offense and by years in the United States 
prior to commitment to the institutions in which they were found at 
the time of the canvass. 

In order to include only convicted persons in the tabulation, when- 
ever it was clear that any prisoner nad not yet been tried for the 
offense charged, but was in prison merely awaiting trial, or was held 
as a witness, the case was omitted from the tables. The total num- 
ber of prisoners shown by these tables is therefore somewhat less than 
the number stated in the Report of the Commissioner-General of Immi- 
gration for 1908, but the value of the tables is rendered greater, since 
they include, as far as could be determined, only those prisoners who 
had actually been convicted of crime. 

The total number of alien prisoners in the United States at the 
time of the enumeration in 1908 who were under sentence for vio- 
lations of the law was 12,853, distributed as follows among the 
various races: 

Tablb 102. — Alien prisoners in the United States^ 1908^ by race. 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalication.] 



Raoe. 


Number 

of 
prisoners. 


Race. 


Number 

of 
p^isonera. 


Africari 


145 
422 
297 
104 
147 
833 
189 
164 

1,191 
149 
693 

1,312 
320 


TtAlfftn, Rnnth. 


3,336 
168 


CanAdian, French 


l/ithnahlan 


CftnftdJRn' Otlyr 


Magyar 


356 


Chinese.. ...TT. 


M^^loftn '... '."" 


794 


Croatian 


Poiish 


1,229 
156 


Engiiah 


Ruffifian. ... . ...x». ^ . s .s. . 


iPffuii^lj 


Soandlnavian . , . . . . . x . x . . ....^. . 


606 


French, 


Scotch 


286 


Oerman 


Slovak 


407 


Greek 


other races ^ 


665 


Hebrew 


Total 




Iriah 


• 12,853 


Tt^fwi, Nfflth 









a Includes 3 not reporting race. 



179 



Digitized by 



Google 



180 



The Immigration G>mmi8sioiL 




Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



181 



GLASSES OF GBIMB. 

Classifying the different offenses into the five crime groups employed 
in other sections of this report, the general character of the criminality 
of these alien prisoners is snown by race in the following table. 
Because of the insufficient definition of the crime in 247 cases, the 
total number of prisoners appearing in this table is 12,606 instead of 
12^853, the unknown character of the crime in these 247 cases making 
it improper to retain them in the totals upon which the percentages 
enaployed in the analysis are computed. 

By appljring to these figures the method of analysis used in the pre- 
ceding sections of this report, something rnore defixdte may be learned 
regarding the criminaUty of these alien prisoners. One disadvantage, 
however, appears ; the aosence of any American-bom prisoners makes 
it impossible to employ that group as a basis of comparison. All that 
can be determinea, therefore, is the relation of the several alien 
groups to each other. 

Table lOS. — DistrihutUm of elaa$e$ of crirru among alien prisoners in the United 

States, 1908. 

[CompOed from data of Bureau of ImmigraUon and Nataralixation.) 
NUMBER. 



Race. 


Total. 


Gainful 
oflenaea. 


Offenses 
of 

viotenoe. 


Oflenset 
against 
publio 
poUcy. 


Oflmss 
aeainat 


Unctoasi- 

fled 
offenses. 


African 


143 
420 
296 
103 
145 
823 
185 
159 

1,167 
149 
689 

1,286 
317 

2,312 
155 
343 
773 

1,186 
156 
502 
283 
388 


58 
134 
106 

19 

58 
380 

42 

86 
541 

59 
384 
250 

97 
676 

63 
100 
327 
453 

04 
237 
128 
100 


60 
49 
33 
61 
48 

116 
76 
27 

306 

88 

161 
1,074 
40 
136 
334 
302 
30 
72 
30 
121 


26 
196 
132 
21 
33 
275 
64 
32 
323 
34 
196 
871 
46 
417 
67 
73 
89 
353 
40 
168 
111 
113 


7 
22 
16 

2 


2 


Canadiin, Frfoch ,..»..^.^.....^ ... 


17 


O^TiA/ilfui^ Other 


11 


Chinme . .' 




Croatian 


6 


Knglinh 


39 

7 

10 
49 

6 
46 
34 

7 
80 

2 
14 
13 
28 

4 
U 

9 
12 


13 


FiT^nkf^ 


e 


French. 


4 




39 


Greek 


1 




18 


Trinh 


34 


TtallAji.Nftrth,.. 


6 


Tt^tA^; flAnt»i 


56 


Llthnahian .... ... .. 


3 




20 


MeSSi;::;::;::::::::::;::::::::::::::::: 


10 


Polish. 


60 


Rtimian . 


9 


fi«mdin^ylan 


14 


Scotch 


6 


Slovak 


42 






Total 


• 12,606 


4,648 


8,837 


3,783 


442 


396 







• Includes 2 not reporting raotb 



Digitized by 



Google 



182 



The Immigration Commission. 



Tablb 103. — DistribtUion of classes of crime among alien prisoners in the United 
States, i^O^— Continued. 

PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



Race. 


TotaL 


Gainful 
offenses. 


Offenses 

of 
personal 
Tiolenoe. 


Offenses 
against 
pubUo 
policy. 


Offenses 
against 
ohastity. 


Unclassi. 

fled 
offenses. 


African 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


40.6 

31.9 

36.5 

/ 18.4- 

40.0 

^46.2 

• 22.7- 

264.1 

"246.8 

^39.6 

/66.7, 

■ 20.1 

3a6 

29.2 

34.2 

29.2 

'42.3 

38.2 

41.0 

-J 47. 2 

.46.2 

26.8 


35.0 
11.7 
11.1 
50.2 
33.1 
14.1 
4L1 
17.0 
17.7 
83.6 
6.5 
6.8 
50.8 
46.5 
25.8 
39.7 
43.2 
25.5 
25.0 
14.3 
10.6 
31.2 


18.2 
47.1 
44.6 
20.4 
22.8 
33.4 
29.2 
20.1 

28.4 
67.7 
14.5 
18.0 
36.8 
21.3 
11.5 
20.8 
25.6 
33.5 
39.2 
29.1 


4.9 
6.2 
5.1 
1.9 
.0 




Canadian, French 




C-anadian, Other . .... 




Chinese..' 








English 


4.7 
3.8 
6.3 
4.2 
3.4 
6.7 
2.6 
2.2 
3.8 
1.3 
4.1 
1.7 
2.4 
2.6 




Finnish 




French, 




German 




'Qreeic 




Hebrew 




Irish 




Italian, North 




Italian, South 




I/ithuahlan 




Magyar 


.;:: ; 


-MeSfcan. 




Pnli#h... 


......... 




Rumian.. . 




Rcsij}f\\n^v\An , 


2.2 
3.2 
3.1 




Scotch 




Slovak 








Total 


loao 


36.9 


26.5 


30.0 


3.5' 









Two of the races shown in this table^ the Hebrew and the French, 
have so much larger proportions of gainful offenses than any others 
, that they stand out prominently. More than half the prisoners of 
each of these two races were convicted of the gainful offenses — in 
the case of the Hebrews 55.7 per cent, and of the French 54.1 per 
cent. Of the prisoners of no other race does the percentage con- 
victed of these crimes exceed 47.2, as is the case of the Scandinavians, 
while of the crimes of the Chinese the gainful offenses form only 18.4 
per cent, a smaller percentage than tney compose of the total crimes 
of any other racial group. 

The large part wmch crimes of personal violence play in the crimi- 
nality of some of the races is striking. Over half of the Chinese and 
North ItaUan prisoners were imprisoned for these crimes, 46.5 per 
cent of the South Italian prisoners, 40 per cent of the Mexican and 
Finnish prisoners, more than a third of the prisoners of the Magyar, 
African, and Greek races, and one-fourth or more of those of the 
Croatian, Slovak, Lithuanian, Polish and Russian races. In only 
nine of the twenty-two race groups shown in the above table do 
offenses of personal violence form less than 25 oer cent of all crimes. 
Only two races, the Irish and the Hebrew, have less than one in every 
ten of their aUen prisoners imprisoned for an offense of personal vio- 
lence. The Irish nave 6.8 per cent and the Hebrews 6.5 per cent. 

Differences in the criminal law of the various States anect most 
the value of the statistics of offenses against public policy. These 
offenses are largely acts which are not criminal m themselves, but are 
made so only by statute. Thus, what may be a ''crime'' in one 
State ma)^ not be one in another. In Massachusetts the nimiber of 
commitments for intoxication is surprisingly large; in many of the 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 183 

States it is surprisingly small. To assume that such differences 
always actually exist m the amoimt of intoxication would be erro- 
neous. The differences in the figures are caused rather by the sever- 
ity or laxity of the laws and their enforcement in different sections 
of the coimtry. The same is doubtless triw of such offenses as va- 
grancy, truancy, and incorrigibiUty. Yet no corrective of these 
differences is possible from the data at hand, and the figures must be 
taken as they stand, with the realization that the;^ are by no means 
as exact standards of measurement as the statistics of most of the 
other crimes. 

The foregoing table shows that the greatest relative frequencjr of the 
aggregate offenses against pubUc policy exists among the Insh and 
the least among the Mexican prisoners, being nearly six times as 
great among the former as among the latter. The proportion of 
Irish prisoners committed for these offenses is remarkably large, 
being 67.7 per cent. Only four races — the two groups of Canadians, 
the Scotch, and the Lithuanians — have more than half as large a pro- 
portion. Furthermore, the Irish is the only race among whose alien 
prisoners offenses of this class compose more than half the total num- 
Der of offenses committed, and amonff the Irish they not only con- 
stitute more than one-half, but more tnan two-thirds. 

Offenses against chastity caused the commitment of 442 of the 
12.606 aUen prisoners confined for known crimes. From the above 
table it appears that the Hebrew race had the largest propor- 
tion, 6.7 per cent of its aUen prisoners belonging to this class. The 
proportion of French alien prisoners of like character is, however, 
nearly as great, being 6.3 per cent. In addition to these two race 
groups there are only two others having over 5 per cent under sen- 
tence for offenses against chastity, the French Canadian, with 5.2 
Ker cent, and the Canadian, other than French, with 5.1 per cent, 
fot far behind these, however, are the English and African races, 
4.9 per cent of the alien prisoners of the former and 4.7 per cent of 
those of the latter being convicted of such offenses. 

The Croatian alone, of the 22 races here shown, had no alien pris- 
oners serving time for an offense against chastity. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



184 



The Immigration Commission. 



GAINFUL OFFENSES. 



The number of alien prisoners confined for the various gainful 
offenses is shown by race in the following table, together with the 
proportions which such offenses form of the total criminality of each 
race: 

Tablb 104.~<?at7i/uZ offeMet compared with all offeruet: Alien priionen in the United 

States, 1908. 

NUMBER. 

[Compfled from data of Boreaa of Immigration and NatoraUxatlon.] 





AU 
oflenaet. 


Gainful offenses. 


Race. 


Blaok- 

eztor- 
tion. 


Burglary. 


Fofttry 

and 

fraud. 


Larceny 
and re- 
ceiving 
stolen 

property. 


Robbery. 


TotaL 


African...^ 


143 
430 

^103 
146 
823 
185 
159 

1,157 
149 
689 

1,286 
317 

2,312 
166 
343 
773 

1,186 
156 
502 
383 
388 




10 
32 
25 
3 
11 

136 
11 
27 

184 
10 

106 
66 
19 

189 
11 
23 

136 

101 
19 
06 
36 
11 


2 
11 

7 


S7 
84 
68 
7 
38 

166 
27 
41 

270 

162 
46 

331 
88 

67 
144 
806 

84 
126 

66 

71 


9 
7 

10 
9 
4 
40 
2 
6 
84 
6 
17 
25 
18 
156 
8 
10 
38 
20 
3 
18 
12 
12 


68 


ni^(\ril(in, Fppnch 




134 


Canadian! Other 




106 


Chinese... 




19 






5 
40 

S 
12 
62 

8 
19 
14 

9 
22 

6 
10 
16 
M 

8 
SI 
16 

6 


58 


English ... 




880 


F<nnt??h 




42 


French 




86 


Qennan 


1 


541 


Greek 


60 


Hebrew 




384 


Irish 


2 
6 
28 


2SB 


TtftliRn, Nort>» 


97 


TtftHftn,' ft>"t>i 


676 


Lith^iAhlan 


58 


Magyar 




100 


Mexican 




397. 


Polish 




468 


Russian 




64. 


flrtftnrlinaviAn 




287 


Scotch 




138 


Slovak 




100 








Total 


« 12,606 


39 


1,248 


349 


2,535 


477 


4,648 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



African 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 

loao 
loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


ao 

.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 

.1 

.0 
.0 
.2 
1.9 
1.2 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 


7.0 
7.6 
8.4 
2.9 
7.6 
16.4 
6.9 
17.0 
16.9 
6.7 
15.4 
6.1 
6.0 
6.0 
7.1 
6.7 
17.6 
8.6 
12.2 
12.6 
M.7 
2.8 


1.4 
2.6 
2.4 
.0 
3.4 
4.9 
1.1 
7.5 
4.6 
6.4 
2.8' 
1.1 
2.8 
LO 
3.9 
2.9 
L9 
2.0 
6.1 
6.2 
6.3 
1.6 


26.9 

2ao 

21.3 
6.8 
26.2 

2ao 

14.6 
26.8 
23.8 
23.5 
36.1 

n.8 

14.2 
14.3 
21.8 
16.6 
18.6 
26.0 

r, 

28.0 
18.3 


6.3 
L7 
8.4 
8.7 
2.8 
4.9 
1.1 
8.8 
2.0 
4.0 
2.6 
1.9 
6.7 
6.7 
1.9 
2.0 
4.8 
L7 
1.9 
3.6 
4.2 
3.1 


4a6 


<TA.narf|ftn. Frepnh ,...„,- ^ . 


31.9 


P.AnAHf An. OthAT 


36.5 


Chinese 


18.4 


Croatian 


4ao 


English 


46.2 


Finnish 


22.7 


French 


64.1 


Oerman 


46.8 


Greek 


30.6 


Hebrew 


56.7 


Irish 


20.1 


Italian. North 


30l6 


Italian, South 


39.2 


Lithuanian 


84.2 


Magyar 


29.2 


Mexican -,..-.„,,, 


42.3 


Polish 


88.2 


Russian ..,.. r, 


4L0 


flAAnrlinftviAli 


47.2 


Scotch 


45.2 


Slovak 


26.8 






Total 


100.0 


.3 


9.9 


2.8 


2ai 


3.8 


36.0 







• Includes 2 not r^;)orting race 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 185 

Prisoners confined for blackmail and extortion are found among only 
four of the races appearing in this table. In the Nortli Italian group 
these form the largest proportion of the total prisoners, 1.9 per cent. 
Next in rank is the South Italian group, 1.2 per cent of whose pris- 
oners were \mder sentence for these cnmes. Of the Ir^h prisoners, 
2. or 0.2 per cent of the total number, were of this class, and of the 
German prisoners only 1, or 0.1 per cent, of the total number. 

Nearly 10 per cent of the total number of prisoners confined for 
known offenses were \mder sentence for burglary. From this table 
it appears that the lai^est proportion of convictions for burglary 
is found among the ^xicans, such convictions forming 17.5 per 
cent of the total convictions of aUen prisoners of that race. Of 
the 159 alien French, however, 27, or 17 per cent, were imprisoned 
for this crime, and of the 823 alien English, 135, or 16.4 per cent. 
Of eight of tne twenty-two races here shown, more than 10 per 
cent of the alien prisoners were incarcerated for bu^lary. These 
eight races are the following: Mexican, 17.5 per cent; R^nch, 17 per 
cent; English, 16.4 per cent; German, 15.9 per cent; Hebrew, 15.4 
pjer cent; Scotch, 12.7 per cent; Scandinavian, 12.5 per cent; Rus- 
sian, 12.2 per cent. The next percentage in rank is that of the Poles, 
which is only 8.5. 

Least of all is the proportion of burglary convictions among the 
Slovak prisoners, only 2.8 per cent of whom were under sentence for 
this crime. Among the Chinese the proportion is only slightly 
greater, being 2.9 per cent. These two races have considerably 
smaller percentages of their alien prisoners confined for burglary than 
any others, the next in rank bemg the Irish, of whose total aUen 
prisoners 5.1 per cent were sentenced for this offense. 

Forgery and fraud are the crimes for which 7.5 per cent of the alien 
prisoners of the French race were in confinement. This is a larger 
percentage than that of any other race groups of alien prisoners 
appearing in the preceding table. Next in rank is the Scandinavian 

g*oup, 6.2 per cent of which was committed to prison for forgery and 
aua. Following these are the Greek, Scotch, and, Russian races, 
each having over 5 per cent of its alien prisoners under sentence for 
these crimes. Then come the English, with 4.9 per cent, and the 
German, with 4.5 per cent. The percentages of tne remaining race 
groups ranjge from 3.9 per cent of the Lithuanians to 1 per cent of the 
Soutn Italians. Of the 103 Chinese alien prisoners, however, not one 
was imprisoned for forgery and fraud. This is the only race group of 
the 22 shown in the preceding table having no cases of these crimes 
recorded against it. 

Larceny and receiving stolen property are, like the aggregate gain- 
ful offenses, more common causes of the commitments or Heorew 
prisoners than of those of any other race, forming 35.1 per cent of 
their total crimes. While the gainful offenses as a class are nearly 
as frequent among the French prisoners as among the Hebrew, com- 
mitments for larceny and receiving stolen property form a much 
smaller percentage, 25.8, of their total commitments. The Chinese 
and the Irish, whose percentages of the aggregate gainful offenses are 
less than those of any other races, likewise have smaller percentages 
of \he selected crimes of larceny and receiving stolen property. Of 

79340'*— VOL 3^—11 13 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



186 The Immigration Commission. 

the Chinese alien prisoners, only 6.8 per cent were convicted of these 
offenses, and of the Irish 11.8 per cent. 

The element of personal violence frequently entering into the 
crime of robbery so far differentiates it from the other gainful offenses 
as to make the relations of the various races to it of special interest. 
Of the 103 Chinese prisoners, 9, or 8.7 per cent, were under sentence 
for robbery. This is the largest percentage appearing in the above 
table, the next in rank being that of the South Italian prisoners, 
6.7 per cent of whom were convicted of this crime. Of only two other 
race groups of aUen prisoners do those prisoners committed for rob- 
bery compose more tnan 5 per cent of the total number. These two 
race groups are the African and North Italian. Of the former. 6.3 
per cent of the prisoners composing it were committed for roboery 
and of the latter 5.7 per cent. The smallest percentage is found 
among the Finnish prisoners, only 1.1 per cent of whom were under 
sentence for this crime. 

The Hebrews. Croatians, and Poles — the three races among which 
convictions for larceny and receiving stolen property are most com- 
mon — have smaller percentages of robbery cases than more than half 
the races. The Mexicans, among whom the greatest relative fre- 
quency of burglary is found, are exceeded in percentage of robbeiy 
convictions by the Chinese, the South ItaUans, the Africans, the 
North ItaUans, and the English; while the French, whose proportion 
of burglary was next in rai^ to that of the Mexicans, have remtively 
fewer convictions of robbery than eight of the other races. The 
most striking revelation of the figures for robbery, however, is the 
large proportion of Chinese prisoners convicted of this offense — 
greater than that of any other race. This is especially noteworthy 
because of the relatively small percentage among the Chinese pris- 
oners of the gainful offenses as a whole and of the crimes of bursary 
and larceny and receiving stolen property considered separately — the 
Chinese having the smallest percentage of prisonera convicted of the 
aggregate ^aimul offenses and also of those imprisoned for larceny 
and receivmg stolen property, and next to the smallest percentage 
of prisoners convicted of ourglary. 

The high percentage of convictions for robbery among the South 
Italian prisoners is Ukewise notable, for among the alien prisoners of 
this race the number committed for the aggr^ate gainful offenses 
and for the specific crimes of larceny and receiving stolen property 
and burglary is relatively less than that of over half the other races. 

Because of the close relation of robbery to crimes of personal 
violence, it will be of interest to recall the races having hiffh percent- 
ages of the latter crime — the Chinese. South Italian, Amcan, and 
North Italian. It is notable that of the four groups of alien pris- 
oners having the highest percentages of robbery, three exceed all 
other race groups in percentage of offenses of personal violence. 
These three are: Chinese, 59.2 per cent; North Itauan, 50.8 per cent; 
South Italian, 46.5 per cent. The Africans, who ranked third in 
percentafi;e of robbeiy, rank seventh in percentage of offenses of per- 
sonal violence, being exceeded in percentage of the latter by the three 
races noted above and by the Mexicans, with 43.2 per cent, the Finns^ 
with 41.1 per cent, and the Aiagyars, with 39.7 per cent. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



187 



OFFENSES OF PERSONAL TIOLENOB. 

More than one-fourth of the total number of alien prisoners in con- 
finement for known offenses were under sentence for various offenses 
of personal violence. 

The distribution of these prisoners among the races is shown by 
crime in the following table: 

Table 106. — Offemti ofpenonal violence compared with all offenses: Alien prisoners in 

the United States, 1908. 

NUMBER. 
(Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization.] 





AHol^ 
lenses. 


Offenses of personal violence. 


Race. 


Abduc- 
tion and 
kidnap- 
ing. 


Simple 
assault. 


Violent 
assault. 


Homi- 
cide. 


Rape. 


Total. 


African 


143 
420 
296 
103 
145 
823 
185 
159 

1,157 
149 
689 

1,286 
317 

2,312 
165 
343 
773 

1,186 
156 
502 
283 
388 




17 
21 
10 

8 
20 
27 
36 

7 

66 
17 
11 

a 

47 
388 
20 
61 
37 
184 
19 
27 
12 
62 


1 
1 
8 
5 
3 
4 
6 
1 
4 
4 
1 
3 
6 
49 


26 
18 
16 
40 
23 
59 
32 
11 

103 
17 
15 
28 
86 

634 
19 
60 

216 
82 
13 
39 
11 
69 


6 

9 

4 

8 

2 

24 

2 

7 

81 

12 

14 

9 

18 

90 

1 

10 
43 
21 
5 
13 
7 
8 


50 


Canadian, French 




49 


Canadian, Other ... 




33 


Chinese 




61 






48 


English 


2 


116 


Finnish 


76 


French 


1 
1 


27 


German 


206 


Oreek 


50 


Hebrew 


4 


' 45 


Irish 


88 


Ttf H«n, Nn»t»i 


5 
13 


161 


itaJlan! Bontb 


1,074 
40 




If amr 




6 
38 
16 
2 
2 


136 




1 


834 


PoHsh 


302 


Rnnri^ 




39 


flnnnriln^Vlan 




72 


8ootch 




30 


Slovak 




6 


121 








Total 


• 12,606 


30 


1,191 


168 


1,588 


360 


3,337 







PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



AtrVnf^ 


loao 
loao 
loao 
loao 

100.ft 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


ao 

.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.2 
.0 
.6 

.1 

.0 
.6 
.0 
1.6 
.6 
.0 
.0 
.1 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 
.0 


U.9 
6.0 
8.4 
7.8 

18.8 

as 

19.5 
4.4 

5.7 
11.4 
1.6 
3.7 
14.8 
16.8 
1X9 
17.8 
4.8 
15.5 
12.2 
5.4 
4.2 
16.0 


a7 

.2 

LO 

4.9 

2.1 

.6 

3.2 

.6 

.8 

2.7 

.1 

.2 

L6 

2.1 

.0 

L6 

4.9 

L3 

1.8 

.4 

.0 

L6 


18.2 
4.8 
6.4 
88.8 
15.9 
7.2 
17.3 
6.9 
8.9 
11.4 
2.2 
2.2 
27.1 
23.1 
12.3 
17.5 
27.8 
6.9 
8.3 
&0 
3.9 
12.9 


4.20 
2.14 
L85 
7.77 
1.38 
2.92 
L08 
4.40 
2.68 
8.05 
2.08 

.70 
6.68 
8.89 

.64 
2.92 
5.56 
1.77 
8.21 
2.59 
2.47 

.77 


35.0 


Canadian, Frwicb 


11.7 


Canadian, Otlwr 


11.1 


Chinese. .' 


59.2 


Cnmtlan 


33.1 


English 


14.1 


FtnMffh 


41.1 


Freoch 


17.0 


German 


17.7 


Oreek 


83.6 


Hebrew 


6.5 


Irbh , 


6.8 


Italian, North 


5a8 


Italian, 8<Hith 


46w6 


Uthuanlan 


25.8 


Magyar 


39.7 


Iffikran 


43.2 


Polish 


26.6 


Ruffiian 


26.0 


R^^^nHinaylsn 


14.8 


Scotch 


10l6 


Slovak 


81.2 






Total 


100.0 


.2 


9.4 


1.3 


12.6 


2.9 


26.5 







• Includes 2 not reporting race. 



Digitized by 



Google 



188 



The ImmigratioQ Commitsioo. 



Only seven of the races shown here haye any alien prisoners con- 
fined tor abduction or kidnaping. Of these seyen, thel^orth Italian 
has the largest percentage of such prisoners, 1 .6 per cent. The French, 
Hebrew, and South It^an each haye 0.6 per cent, the English 0.2 
per cent, and the Germans and Mexicans 0.1 per cent each. 

Simple assault was the offense of 9.4 per cent of the 12,606 alien 
prisoners enumerated. From the foregoing table it appears that sim- 
ple assault is relatively more frequent as an offense of ahen criminals 
of the newer immigrant races than of those of the older. The Finns, 
Magyars, South Italians, Slovaks, Poles, North Italians. Croatians, 
Lithuanians, and Russians all have larger percentages or their alien 
prisoners confined for assault than have sucn earlier unmigrant races 
as the Germans, Scandinavians, Canadians, French, Scotch, Irish, 
English, and Hebrew. Arranging these races in two groups in 
descending order of their percentages, the comparison becomes more 
striking: 



Newer Immigrant races. 


Percent- 
age of 
simple 
assault. 


Older immigrant races. 


Percent- 
age of 
simple 
assaolt. 


Fimilsh..... 


19.6 
17.8 


German 


5.7 


Mi^ar 


B<?*ndinavlftn ... . . w a ^ . . . . . 


5.4 


Ttl^n^n finnth 


Canadian, French 


5.0 


Slovak 


French... 


4.4 


Polish 


15.6 
14.8 
13.8 


Scotch 


4.2 


Italian, North 


Irish 


3.7 


Croatian 


Canadian (other than French) 


3.4 


Lithuanian 


12.9 
12.2 


English..^ .' 


3.3 




HeSrew 


L6 









Of all the 22 races shown in Table 105, the Finns, with 19.5 per cent, 
have the largest percentage of simple assault, while the Hebrews, 
with 1.6 per cent, have the smallest. The fact that the Chinese, who 
have the largest percentage of the aggregate offenses of personal vio- 
lence, are exceeded in percentage of simple assault by eleven races 
(the nine newer immigjrant races shown above and the Africans and 
Greeks) suggests the Ukelihood of finding some other of the crimes of 
personal violence playing a very large part in Chinese criminality. 

Of the 3,337 alien prisoners committed for offenses of personal 
violence, only 168 were sentenced for violent assault. The crime 
itself is of such gravity, however, that the relation which these 168 
cases bear to the total criminaUty of the various races is of importance. 
Of the races having a high percentage of cases of simple assault 
the Finnish is the om^r one that stands out prominently in the figures 
of violent assault, which forms 3.2 per cent of its total crimes. But 
although the proportion of prisoners committed for simple assault is 
greater among the Finns than among anv other group of alien prison- 
ers, the Chinese and the Mexicans Doth have larger proportions of 
cases of violent assault. Of the criminality of tne alien prisoners 
belonging to each of these two latter races violent assault forms 4.9 
per cent. The commission of this offense is considerably less among 
all of the other races than among the Chinese, Mexicans, and Finns. 
More noteworthy, however, than anything else shown by this table 
is the fact that among the prisoners of two of the races, the Lithu- 
anian and the Scotch, not one is found who was imprisoned for vio- 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



189 



lent assault, and this in spite of the fact that one-fourth of all the 
Lithuanian prisoners and one-tenth of all the Scotch prisoners were 
eommitted tor offenses of personal violence. 

Turning to the fibres or homicide, the startling fact is shown that 
more than half of tne cases of personal violence consisted of accom- 
plished or attempted homicide. When the proportions which such 
cases bear to the total offenses of the various races are examined 
equally striking conditions are revealed. While of the Chinese pris- 
oners 38.8 per cent were conmiitted for homicide, only 87.8 per cent 
of the Mexican prisoners, who stand next in rank, were sentenced 
for this crime. In addition to these two raoes, the North Italian is 
the only one more than 25 per cent of whose alien prisoners were 
convicted of accomplished or attempted homicide. The North Italian 

Percentage is only slightly less than that of the Mexicans, being 27.1. 
>ut one other race has over 20 per cent of its alien prisoners under 
sentence for these crimes. This is the South Italian, of the crimes of 
whose alien prisoners homicide and attempted homicide form 23.1 per 
cent. Sharply contrasted with these races stand the Hebrew and 
Irish, only 2.2 per cent of the alien prisoners of each of which races 
were coimned for such offenses. » 

As homicide is considered the gravest of all crimes, rearrangement 
of the races shown in Table 105, to bring out more clearly the relation 
of homicide to the total criminality of each, will be of value. Such 
rearrangement, in descending order of percentage, is as foDows: { 



Percent. 

Chinese 38. 8 

Mexican 27. 8 

Italian, North 27.1 

Italian, South 23.1 

African 18.2 

Magyar 17. 5 

Finnidi 17. 3 

Croatian. . . .' 15. 9 

Slovak 12.9 

Lithuanian 12. 3 

Greek 11.4 



Percent. 

German 8.9 

Russian 8. 3 

English 7.2 

French 6. 9 

Polish 6.9 

Scandinavian 6. 

Canadian, other than French 5. 4 

Canadian. French 4. 3 

Scotch 3. 9 

Hebrew 2. 2 

Irish 2.2 



Less than 1 per cent of the alien prisoners of the Lithuanian, Irish, 
and Slovak races were under sentence for the crime of rape. Only 
0;64 per cent of the Lithuanian, 0.70 per cent of the Irish, and 0.77 
per cent of the Slovak alien prisoners were under such sentence. 
Widely different in this regard is the group of alien prisoners of the 
Greek race, 8.05 per cent of whom were in confinement for rape. No 
other race has so large a percentage as this, although that of the 
Chinese, 7.77 per cent, is only slightly smaDer. In addition to the 
Greek and Chmese races, there are two others having more than 5 

Eer cent of their alien prisoners under sentence for this crime — the 
[orth Italian, with 5.68 per cent, and the Mexican, with 5.56 per cent. 
Of the other races the percentages range from 0.64, of the Lithuanian, 
to 4.40, of the French. 



Digitized by 



Google 



190 



The ImmigratioQ Commissicm. 



OFFENSES AGAINST FUBLIO POLICT. 

The distribution of offenses against public policy is shown by race 
in the foUowing table: 

Table \Q%,^Off ernes against public policu compared with all offenses: Alien prisoners 

%n the United States, 1908. 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigratfcm and Naturalisation.] 
NUMBER. 





All 
offenses. 


Offenses against public policy. 


Raoa. 


Incorri- 
gibiUty. 


Intoxi- 
cation. 


Vagrancy 

and 
truancy. 


AU 
Other. 


TotaL 


Afrtcan. 


143 
420 
296 
108 
146 
823 
185 
IfiO 

1,157 
149 
688 

1,286 
317 

2,312 
165 
343 
773 

1,186 
166 
602 
283 
388 


4 
23 
U 


6 
103 
66 


6 
46 
86 

6 

8 
90 




146 

6 
46 
246 
10 
01 
18 

9 
16 
118 
12 
38 
32 
40 


10 
27 
20 
16 
18 
74 
17 
17 
99 
25 

113 

144 
88 

253 
83 
53 
56 

165 
10 
67 
20 
69 


26 


Canadian, Fr<»nnh r ,....'. ..,,.. 


196 


(Radian! other .-.,,,,, --,-.^^ 


132 


Ch|n^»f?«»,,!... 


21 


C^^mtian ....i.........,.-r.... 




7 
00 
26 

4 
63 

2 

1 
472 

3 
18 

8 

6 
18 
44 

6 
60 
64 
11 


33 


English 


21 
2 
2 

26 

1 

36 
10 


276 


Flnniffh t . . 


54 


FrmCh T.-....i..,.,.Tr,.-rT 


S2 


Qfrman 


S2S 


Greek i 


S4 


Hebrew. 


196 


Iiiah 


871 


Italian, North ...,,,., ,-. , - , - , 


46 


Italian, Roiith. r r 


00 
8 
6 


417 


Lithuanian 


57 


Maeirar 


78 


Mexkan. 


89 


Polish. 


26 
8 

13 
5 
3 


868 


Ruffiiian. ...r ---,-„-,., .--... 


40 


f^f>1|n<j||nAvlan 


168 


Sootch. 


111 


Slorak 


113 






TotaL 


• 12,606 


260 


1,069 


1,074 


1,880 


3,788 





PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 



AM^mn.. 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100. 
100.0 
100.'0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


2.8 
6.6 
8.7 

.0 

.0 
2.6 
1.1 
L8 
2.2 

.7 
6.2 

.8 

.0 
2.6 
LO 
L6 

.0 
2.2 
1.9 
2.6 
L8 

.8 


4.2 

24.6 

22.0 

.0 

4.8 

lao 

14.1 

2.5 

4.6 

1.8 

.1 

86.7 
.9 
.6 
6.2 
1.7 
2.8 
8.7 
3.8 

12.0 

19.1 
2.8 


4.2 

10.7 

12.2 

6.8 

5.6 

10.9 

4.9 

6.7 

12.6 

4.0 

6.7 

19.1 

•3.2 

. 3.9 

8.4 

2.6 

1.9 

9.9 

7.7 

7.6 

11.8 

10.3 




18.2 


n^fiA/iiAn French t,....,t.tt 




47 1 


Ctaadianj Ot^^ .,, 




44.6 


Chinese ....--r 




20.4 


Croatian t.,.tt^-t--t r- 




23.8 


EnglW»,-,„„ 




33.4 


Fliini#h...„T., - 




29.3 


French. ......r-rtT rr it 




20 1 


Qfrman rr. ,, 




27 


Oreeic 




22.8 


H^rew 




28.4 


Irish. 




67.7 


Italian, North ,,,..-,,. 




14.5 
18.0 


Italian, 8outh 








36,8 


l£agyar 




21.3 


M^can. 




11 5 


Polish T. Tr . 




29 8 


Rnssian 




26.6 


f^f^^i^fnikiitn 




88.5 


Scotch. 




89.3 


Slovak 




29 1 








Total. 


100.0 


2.1 


8.5 


8.6 




80.0 







• Includes 2 not reporting nos. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 191 

It will be noted that more than two-thirds (67.7 per cent) of all 
Irish alien prisoners were confined for oflFenses against public policy, 
while less than half the alien prisoners belonging to every other 
race were under sentence for such crimes. 

A partial explanation of these figures appears when reference is 
made to those of the specific olfense of mtoxication. The four 
races which have larger percentages of offenses against pubUc poUcy 
than any others are also the four whose percentages or intoxication 
cases are greater than those of any others, namely, the Irish, French 
Canadian, Canadian other than French, and Scotch. And in 
each of these four race groups more than half of the commitments 
for offenses against pubuc policy are found to be for the offense of 
intoxication. Of the Irish aUen prisoners, 36.7 per cent were com- 
mitted for intoxication; of the French Canadian, 24.6 per cent; of 
the Canadian other than French, 22 per cent; and of the Scotch, 
19.1 per cent. 

Altnough intoxication sends to the penal institutions more than 
a third of the Irish aUen prisoners and more than a fifth of the 
Canadian, it plays a relatively unimportant part in the commitments 
of the aUen prisoners of most of the races. Among 15 of the 22 
races here enumerated, it is the offense of less than 10 per cent of 
the prisoners, while of the North and South Itahan and the Hebrew 
prisoners not even one in every hundred was committed for drunken- 
ness, and of the Chinese' aliens in the prisons not one received his 
sentence for this offense. 

Those races among whose aUen prisoners offenses of personal 
violence appear most conunon (such as Chinese, the Mexican, the 
North ana South Italian) are among those whose aUen prisoners 
committed for intoxication are relatively few in number. Whether 
this means that these races are comparatively temperate, or only 
that they are apprehended with greater frequency for other crimes, 
it is impossible to determine, but the facts of their i)ercentage of alien 
prisoners under sentence for serious crimes of violence and their 
modest showing on the rolls of drunkenness are rather enigmatic in 
view of the popular conception that drunkenness and crimes of 
passion ^o together. 

Commitments to prison for vagrancy and truancy, as for intoxi- 
cation, differ greatly in various sections of the country, and the 
figures are thus less conclusive than might be desired. The 
largest proportion of vagrants and truants is found among the 
alien Irish prisoners, of whom they compose 19.1 per cent. The 
smallest proportion appears among the Mexican prisoners, of whom 
they compose 1.9 per cent, or only one- tenth as large a part as they 
form of tne Irish prisoners. The Irisn percentage of vagrancy and 
truancy is considerably greater than that of anv other race group of 
alien prisoners, the German percentage, which is second m rank, 
being only 12.5. Besides the Irish and German there are only five 
races whose aUen prisoners confined for these offenses form over 10 

Eer cent of their total alien prisoners. These five races are the 
anadian other than French, Scotch, English, French Canadian, and 
Slovak. Of the Polish aUen prisoners 9.9 per cent were committed 
for vagrancy and truancy, but with this exception all other races 
than those enuinerated above have considerably less than 10 per cent 
of their alien prisoners under sentence therefor. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



192 



The Immigration Commissioa. 



The figures for incorrigibility have been kept separate from those 
for vagrancy and truancy in the tabulation of the crimes of alien 
prisoners in order that the data might be rendered as exact as possible. 
Here, however, wide differences in the practice of the courts of the 
various States are encoimtered. In some sections of the countij 
the number of incorrij^bles found in the prisons is large, in others it is 
very small. These %ures, therefore, fall somewhat short of por- 
traying the exact extent of alien incorrigibility, and, like those of 
intoxication and vagrancjr and truancy, must be interpreted with 
these differences in tne various legal systems in mind. 

The for^oin^ table shows that of the offenses for which the alien 
imsoners considered in this chapter were committed to penal institu- 
tions, incorrigibility was the onense of a considerably larger propor- 
tion of the french Canadian and Hebrew than of any of the other 
race groups shown. Of alien prisoners of the former race 6.5 per cent 
were committed for this offense and of those of the latter 5.2 per cent. 
The next percentage in rank is that of the Canadian other than 
French, which is 3.7. With these exceptions no. race has as manv 
as 3 per cent of its alien prisoners confinea for incorrigibility. Indeea, 
four of the races, the Cninese, Croatian, Mexican, and North Italian^ 
have no aUens imprisoned for this offense, while the Greek, Irish, and 
Slovak have less tnan 1 per cent. 

OFFENSES AGAINST CHASTITY. 

From the various offenses against chastity, the " crimes of prosti- 
tution'' have been selected for special analvsis of their relative 
frequency among the causes of impnsonment of alien criminals. 

Table 107. — Offenm against chastity compared with all offenses: Alien prisoners in the 

United States, 1908. 

[Compiled from daU of Boreaa of Imniigration and Natu^tilization.] 

NUMBER. 





AD 
offenses. 


Offenses against chastity. 


Race. 


Crimes of 
prostitu- 
tion. 


AU other. 


TotaL 


African 


143 
420 
296 
103 
145 
823 
185 
150 

1,157 
149 
689 

1,286 
317 

2,312 
155 
84S 
773 

1,186 
156 
502 
283 
388 




7 
19 
11 

2 


7 


CartivliftHv Flinch 


3 

4 


22 


OanjvllAn, '^ther .. . . ...... ^.s 


15 


Chinese 


2 


Croatian 






English 


4 
1 
2 
6 
1 

12 
5 
2 

15 


35 
6 
8 

44 

4 
84 
29 

5 
74 

2 
14 
12 
28 

4 
11 

9 
10 


89 


Finnish 


7 


French 


10 

19 


Qennan 


Greek 


5 


Hebrew 


46 


Irish 


14 


Italian, North 


7 


Italian, South 


80 


TiJthnanfan....,, . . . . ^ . a . 


2 


Magyar 




14 


Mexican 


1 


18 


Polish 


98 

4 


Russian 




Scandinavian 




11 


bootch 







Slovak 


2 


n 




Total 


a 12, 606 


m 


888 


4Q 







a Inchides 2 not reporting raotw 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



193 



Tablb 107.— 0/«fwet againit chastity comparsi with all offmns: AUsn pmofntn in Urn 
United States, iPOtf— Continued. 

PER CENT OF ALL OFFENSES. 





AU 

offenses. 


Offenses against chastity. 


Race. 


Crimes of 

prostito- 

Uon. 


All other. 


TotaL 


Afrinui 


100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 

loao 

100.0 

loao 

100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 


0.00 
.71 

L35 
.00 
.00 

.54 
1.26 
.43 
.67 
1.74 
.30 
.63 
.65 
.00 
.00 
.13 
.00 
.00 
.00 
.00 
.62 




4.9 


Oftiifulian, Frpnch ...... .... 




5.S 


OnnadlAn, Other ... 




5.1 


Chinww..' 




1.9 


Croatian .... 




.0 


English 




4.7 


Finnish 




3.8 


French 




6.8 


German 




4.2 


Qnek 




3.4 


Hebrew 




6.7 


Trftfh ... , . 




2.6 


It4^1i^, Nmth 




2.2 


ItAlian', 8onth. ...... 




3.8 


Lithuanian 


1.8 


Mwy^r 




4.1 


Meili^an 




1.7 


Po|i«h 




2.4 


Rr|i|«iVl.r . r X 




2.6 


BcanrltfiAvlftn , . 




2.2 


Scotch 




3.2 


Slovalc 




3.1 








Total 


100.0 


.47 




8.5 









Although the number of aliens in penal institutions for these 
offenses is small, the range of their percentages of the several race 
groups of alien prisoners is consideraole. The highest percentage is 
that of the Hebrews, 1.74 j)er cent of the alien pnsoners of this race 
being convicted of such crimes. Two other races have over 1 per 
cent of their alien prisoners under sentence for these offenses — the 
Canadian other than French, with 1.35 per cent, and the French, 
with 1.26 per cent. 

The most striking thing shown by this table, however, is that of 
the 22 races 9 have no fdien prisoner the cause of whose conamit- 
ment was a ''crime of prostitution.'' These 9 races are the African, 
Chinese, Croatian,^ Lithuanian, Magyar, PoUsh, Russian, Scandina- 
vian, and Scotch. 



Digitized by 



Google 



194 



The Immigration Commission. 



8UMMABY. 



This analysis is summarized in the following tables, showing the 
races arrMiged in descending order of their percentages of the various 
crimes and classes of crime: 



Table 108. — Relative frequency of gainful offenses among alien prisoners in the OhUed 

States, 1908. 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalisation.) 



Race. 



AU gainful offenta. 

Hebrew 

French 

Scandinavian 

German 

English 

Scotch 

Mexioan 

Russian 

African 

Croatian 

Greek 

Polish 

Canadian, other than French. . 

Lithuanian 

Canadian. French 

Italian, North 

Italian, South 

Magyar 

Slovak 

Finnish 

Irish 

Chinese 



BUukmail and extofHon, 



Italian, North.. 
Italian, South.. 

Irish 

German. 



BurgloTf. 



French , 

English , 

German 

Hebrew , 

Scotch , 

Scandinavian , 

Russian 

Polish 

Canadian, other than French. 

Canadian, French 

Croatian 

Lithuanian. 

African 

Greek 

Magyar 

Italian, North 

Italian. South. 

Finnlsn 

Irish 

Chinese 

Slovak 



Forgery and fraud. 

Frenoh 

Soandlntvian 

Greek 

Sootoh 

Russian. 

English 

German 

Lithuanian 



Percent. 



66.7 

64.1 
47.2 
46.8 
46.2 
45.2 
42.3 
41.0 
4a6 
40.0 
39.6 
38.2 
86.5 
84.2 
31.0 
30.6 
20.2 
29.2 
25.8 
22.7 
20.1 
I&.4 



L9 
L2 
.2 
.1 



17.6 
17.0 
16.4 
16.9 
16.4 
12.7 
12.5 
12.2 
8.6 
8.4 
7.6 
7.6 
7.1 
7.0 
S.7 
S.7 
6.0 
6.0 
&9 
&1 
2.9 
2.8 



7.5 
6.2 
&4 
&S 

&1 
4.0 
4.6 
8.9 



Race. 



Forging and/raui->Contlnued. 



Croatian 

Maryar 

Hebrew 

Italian, North 

Canadian. French. 
Canadian, Other... 

Polish 

Mexican 

Slovak 

African 

Finnish 

Irish 

Italian, South 

Chinese 



Larceny and receiving ttolen property. 



Hebrew 

Croatian 

Polish 

African 

French 

Scandinavian 

Greek 

German 

Scotch 

Russian 

Canadian, other than French.. 

Uthoanian 

Canadian, Frenoh 

English 

Mexican 

Slovak 

Magyar 

Finnish 

Italian, South 

lUlian, North 

Irish 

ChlnsM 



JUbbery. 



ItaUan, Sooth.. 

Afrioan 

Italian. Nwth.. 
English. 



Scotch. 

Greek 

Preudi. 

Scandlnavlaa 

Canadian, other than Fmidh.. 

Slovak 

Gorman 

Magyar 

Croatlin 

Hebrew 

Irish 

Lithuanian 

Russian. ..•............•.•*..• 

Canadian, FniMDh 

Polish 

Finnish 



Percmt. 



3.4 
2.9 
2.8 
2.8 
2.6 
X4 

xo 

LO 
L6 
L4 
LI 
LI 
LO 
LO 



S5.1 
2&2 
26.0 
2&9 
25^8 
24.9 
23.5 
23.8 
28.0 
21.8 
21.8 
21.8 

2ao 
2ao 
lao 

18.8 
16^6 
14.6 
14.3 
14.2 
1L8 
6.8 



8.7 
6.7 
6.3 
5l7 
4.0 
4.8 
42 
4.0 
8.8 
3.6 
3.4 
8.1 
2.9 
2.9 
2.8 
15 
L9 
L9 
L9 
L7 
L7 
LI 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



195 



Table 109. — Relative frequency of offenses of personal violence among aHen prisoners in 

the united States, 1908. 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization.] 



Race. 


Percent 


Race. 


Percent 


All offenses of personal violenee. 
Chinese^ 


59.2 
50.8 
46.6 
43.2 
41.1 
39.7 
35.0 
33.6 
33.1 
31.2 
26.8 
25.5 
25.0 
17.7 
17.0 
14.3 
14.1 
11.7 
11.1 
10.6 
6.8 
6.5 

1.6 
.6 
.6 
.6 
.2 
.1 
.1 

19.5 

17.8 

16.8 

16.0 

15.5 

14.8 

13.8 

12.9 

12.2 

11.9 

1L4 

7.8 

6.7 

5l4 

6.0 

4.8 

4.4 

4.2 

3.7 

3.4 

3.3 

1.6 

4.9 
4.9 
8.2 
2.7 
3.1 
2.1 


Violent MMitZt— Continued. 
Italian, :Jorth 


1.6 


Italian, Torth 


Magyar 


L5 


Italian iSouth 


Slovak 


1.5 


Mexican 


Polish 


1.3 


FlnnUh 


Russian 


L3 


Mftiryf^r ..... . ,-,,--■ 


Canadian, other than French 


LO 


African 


African 


.7 


Creek 


French 


.6 


Croatian 


English 


.6 


Slovalc 


Scandinavian • 


.4 


I^ithnanian 


German rr,- 


.3 


Polish 


OaTi^ian, French ^ ... r - 


.2 




Irish .' 


.2 


Oerman 


Hebrew 


.1 


French 


T/1thnanian r , r , . - t 


.0 


flcanflinavian 


Scotch 


.0 


English 


Homicide 

Chinese 

Mexican 




Oaiiuadian, French 




Canadian; Other 

Scotch 

Ti4eti 


38.8 
27.8 


Hebrew 


Italian, Torth 

Italian, South 

African 


27.1 
23.1 
18.2 


Abduction and kidnaping. 


Magyar 


17.5 


Italian, North. 

French 

Hebrew 


Finnish 

Croatian 

Slovak 

Lithuanian 


17.3 
16.9 
12.9 
1Z3 


English 

Oerman 

Mexican 


Greek 

German 

Russian 

English 

French 


11.4 
8.9 
8.3 
7.2 
6.9 


Simple assavlt. 


Polish 


6.9 


rinnlffh... 


Scandinavian 


6.0 


Magyar 


Canadian, other than French ............ 


6.4 


Italian South 


Canadian', French 


4.8 


Slovak 


Scotch...' 


3.9 


Polish 


Hebrew 


2.2 


Italian, North 


Irish 


2.2 


OiYMtian 


Rape. 

Greek 

Chtoese 

Italian, North 

Mexksan 

French 

African 

Italian, South 




Lithuanian 




Russian 

African 

Greek 

Chinese 

Oerman 

Scandinavian 

Canadian, French 


8.06 
7.77 
6.68 
5.56 
4.40 
4.20 
3.89 


Mexican 

French 

Scotch... 

Irish.... : 

Canadian, other than French 

RngUsh 

HeBrew 


Runian 

English. ................................ 

Magyar 

German 

Scandinavian 

Scotch 

Canadian, French 

Hebrew 


8.21 
2.92 
2.92 
2.68 
2.59 
2.47 
2.14 
2.03 


Violent assault. 


Polish 


1.77 


Chinese 


Croatian 


1.38 


Mexican 


Canadian other than French 


1.36 


Finnish... T.wr'T - .,---,,., 


Finnish 


1.08 


Greek 


Slovak 


.77 


Croatian. . ,r T-r,T 


Irish 


.70 




Lithtianian 


.64 









Digitized by 



Google 



196 



The Immigration Ommiission. 



Table 110. — ReleHve frequency of offenseM against puhUe poKcy oTnong aHen prisonen 

in &e UniUd States, 1908, 

{Oomplted from date of Buresa of Immlgnitkm and Natnrallcatlon.] 



Race. 


Percent 


Race. 


Percent. 


its oTefwet o^cMjI |wMk pottey. 
Irish 


W.7 
47.1 
44.6 
30.2 
36.8 
38.6 
33.4 
29.8 
29.2 
29.1 
28.4 
27.9 
26.6 
22.8 
22.8 
21.8 
20.4 
20.1 
18.2 
18.0 
14.6 
11.6 

6.6 
5.2 
8.7 
2.8 
2.6 
2.6 
2.6 
2.2 
2.2 
1.9 
1.9 
1.8 
1.6 
1.3 
1.1 
.8 
.8 
.7 


/utegfcflfton 
Iriah 


36.7 


Canadian, Fr^moii,,,,,.,,.,,,^,^,,,--.^. 


<^anadlan, FreDflii 


24.6 


Canadian) Ot»»flr .... r ............... r . . 


<^anadian, Other ............. 


22.6 


Scotch...' 


Scotch - 


19.1 




Finnish 


14.1 


AA^nfi^f^vian . , r ......,..,,.. t 


Snan'^lnavian 


12.0 


English 


English 


10 9 


PoBsh 


T.itbuanian 


6.2 


Finnish. , 


rroatian 


4.8 


Slovak 


German a . . 


4 6 


Hebrew 


African 


4.2 


Oenpan ^...x 


Hiijffliari., ^ . . 


3.8 


Russian 


Polish 


3.7 


Croatian 


Slovak 


2.8 


Greek 


French 


2.5 


Hafcyar 


Mexican 


2.3 


Chinese 


Magyar 


1.7 


French 


GrS2^::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 


1.3 


African 


Italian, North 


9 


Italian, South 


TtAlf^ui! South ... 


.6 


Italian) North 


Hebrew 


,1 


Mexican 


Chinese 




Canadian, French 

Hebrew 

Canadian, other than French 

African 

English 

Italian, South 

Scandinavian 

German 

Polish 


Vagrancy and truancy. 

Irish 

German 

Canadian, other than French 

Scotch 

English 

Canadian, French 

Slovak 

Polish 

Lithuanian 


19.1 
12.5 
12.2 
11.3 

las 

10.7 
10.3 
9.9 
8.4 


Lithuanian.. 

Russian 

Scotch 

Magyar 

French , 

Finnish 

Irish 

Slovak 


Scandinavian 

Hebrew 

(hinese 

French 

Croatian 

Finnish 

African 

Greek 


7.7 
7.6 
6.7 
5.8 
5.7 
6.5 
4.9 
4.2 
4.0 


Chinese 


Italian, South 


8.9 


Croatian 

TtA]in.n North 




Italian, North 

Magyar 


3.2 
2.6 


Mexican 




Mexican 


1.9 



Digitized by 



Google 



ImmigratioD and Crime. 



197 



Tablb lil.—R4kUiiv4 frequency qf ofen$€$ again$t duutUy amonf aUen primmin in tkt 

Umted Stales, 1908. 

[OompUed from daU of Bureau of Immifratieo and Naturallsatioii.] 



Race. 



Per cent. 



Race. 



Par cant. 



AU offente* against ekastUy. 



Hebrew 

French 

Canadian, French. 
Oanadian, Other.. 

Alrtcan 

English 

German 

Magyar 

Finnish 

Italian, South 

Greek 

Scotch 

Slovak 

Irish 



Polish 

Italian. North. 
Scandinavian.. 

Chinese 

Mexican 

Lithuanian 

Croatian 



6.7 
6.8 
5.2 
5.1 
4.9 
4.7 
4.2 
4.1 
3.8 
3.8 
3.4 
3.2 
3.1 
2.6 
2.6 
2.4 
2.2 
2.2 
1.9 
1.7 
1.3 



Crimef c/ proftUtUion. 

Hebrew 

Canadian, other than French... 

French 

Canadian, French 

Greek 

Italian, Booth 

Italian North 

Finnish 

Slovak 

English 

German 

Irish 

Mexiotn 

African 

Chinese 

Croatian 

Litliuanian 

SKf::;::::::;:;::;:::;;:::; 

Russian 

Scandinavian 

Sootrh 



1.74 
1.36 
1.26 
.71 
.67 
.61 
.61 
.54 
.52 
.49 
.43 
.39 
.18 



2. Alien Prisoners Committed Within Three Years After 
Arrival in the United States. 

From the schedules of the Bureau of Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion it has been possible to determine the length of residence in the 
United States oi^l2,425 of the 12,853 alien prisoners considered in 
this chapter. As the length of time each pnsoner had been incar- 
cerated was also shown on the schedules, the determination of his 
period of residence in this country prior to commitment has been 
rendered possible. Without entering into a detailed analysis of the 
resulting data, the principal aspects of one phase may be discussed. 

The various periods of residence in the Umted States prior to com- 
mitment have been divided into two general groups— the period 
under three years and that of three years or over. To bring out the 
most important facts shown by the data, a consideration of those 
alien prisoners whose commitment to the penal institution in which 
they were found occurred prior to three years of residence in the 
country will be suflRcient. 

The total number of alien prisoners whose period of residence in 
the United States was discovered is 12,425, and approximately one- 
fourth of these arrived in the United States less than three years 
before the time of their commitment. 

These figures, however, require further anlaysis. The fact that a 
certain number and percentage of the alien prisoners had been in the 
United States less than three years at the time of their imprisonment 
may take on a different aspect when the crimes of these prisoners are 
known. Here, as in the study of alien prisoners in general, to which 
the first part of this chapter is devoted, a totaling of all crimes might 
result in the drawing of erroneous conclusions. A separation of 
these prisoners into groups according to the nature of tneir crimes 
is therefore desirable. Such a separation has been made for the 



Digitized by 



Google 



198 



The Immigration Commission. 



groups of gainful oflfenses, offenses of personal violence, against 
public policy, and against chastity. Because of their uncertain 
character, unclassified crimes and offenses not defined are not shown 
in a separate tabulation. 

GAINFUL OFFENSES. 

The number of alien prisoners convicted of gainful offenses who 
reported years in the United States was 4,467. Of these 1,150, or 
25.7 per cent, had been committed within three years after their 
arrival in the country to the pencd institution in which they were 
found. 

Table 112. — Aliens in prison for gainful offenses who had been in the United Stales leu 
than three years prior to commitmentt by race: United States^ 1908. 

[Complied from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization.] 



Race. 


Number 
reporting 
years in 
TJnited 
states. 


In United States leas 
than 3 years prior to 
commitment. 




Number. 


Percent. 


African 


56 
106 
100 

17 

56 
356 

41 

84 
527 

58 
369 
240 

05 
647 

51 
100 
321 
442 

60 
231 
125 

06 


8 
25 
32 


14. S 


Oftnadlao, Fr<*nchxx ^ x . 


2S.e 


Canadian,' Other 


S2.0 


Chinese . 


.0 


Croatian 


20 
73 


26 
08 
10 
83 
32 
26 

186 
11 
30 
86 

161 
26 
31 
21 
37 


61.8 


RngiiAb ^^,^ , , ., 


20.6 


Finnish 


23.0 


French 


S1.0 


f><»mian .... .....,, . . . . . 


18.6 


Greek 


S2.8 


Hebrew 


22.6 


Irish 


13.0 


Italian, North . . 


27.4 


Italian, South 


28.7 


I^ithnnnlan 


21.6 


Magyar 


30.0 


Mexican 


96.6 


Polish 


36.4 


Russian i 


4S.S 


Scandinavian 


13.4 


Scotch 


16.8 


Slovak 


87.8 






Total 


• 4,467 


1,160 


36.7 







a Includes 1 not reporting race. 

The largest proportion so committed is found among the Croatian 

J>risoners. There were 56 aUen prisoners of this race under sentence 
or gainful offenses who reported years in the United States; 29 of 
these, or 51.8 per cent, had been in this country less than three years 
at the time of their incarceration. The Croatian is the only race 
having more than one-half its gainful offense prisoners belonging to 
the class whose period of residence in the United States prior to 
commitment was less than three years, the proportion next in rank 
being that of the Russians, or 43.3 per cent. In addition to the 
Croatian and Russian there are, however, three races in which the 
number committed within three years after arrival exceeds one-third 
of the number reporting. These are the Magyar, Slovak, and Polish 
races, their proportionsbeing, respectively, 39 per cent, 37.8 per cent, 
and 36.4 per cent. In six other races the proportion exceeds one- 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



199 



fourth. In the order of their rank these are the Greek, Canadian 
other than French, French, South Italian, North Italian, and 
Mexican. 

Thus in each of 11 of the 22 races shown, more than 25 per cent of 
the alien prisoners guilty of gainful offenses who reported years in 
the United States were imprisoned within three years after their 
arrival in the country. Moreover, the above table shows that in 
only five of the 22 races was the proportion of such prisoners less than 
20 per cent, these five races being the German, Scotch, African, 
Scandinavian, and Irish. But in each of these the proportion 
exceeds 10 per cent, the smallest being that of the Irish, or 12.9 per 
cent. 

OFFENSES OF PERSONAL VIOLENCE. 

In the group of prisoners under sentence for offenses of personal 
violence a slightly smaller proportion is found of those whose period 
of residence in the United States prior to commitment was less than 
three years. The total number in this group who reported years in 
the United States was 3,241, of whom 808,. or 24.9 per cent, were 
imprisoned within three years after arrival. 

Table 113. — Aliens in prison for offenses of personal violence who had been in the United 
States less than three years prior to comrriitmenty by race: United States, 1908, 

[CompUed from data of Bureau of Immigratloii and Naturalization.] 



Raoa. 



Number 
reporting 
years In 
United 
States. 



In United States less 
than 3 years prior to 
commitment. 



Number. Per cent. 



AfHcan 

Canadian, French 
Canadian, Other. . 

Chinese 

Croatian 

English 

Fiimiah 

French 

German 

Greek 

Hebrew 

Irish 

ItaUan, North.... 
Italian, South.... 

Lithuanian 

Magyar 

MeScan 

Polish 

Russian 

Scandinayian 

Scotch 

Sloyak 

Total 



49 
47 
32 
56 
48 

109 
76 
27 

198 
46 
43 
84 

167 

1,044 

40 

134 

323 

297 
39 
69 
30 

121 



7 

7 

9 

3 

10 

11 

16 

4 

38 

17 

9 

9 

34 

317 

8 

60 

60 

82 

17 

9 

5 

32 



14.8 
14.9 
28.1 
6.4 
20.8 
10.1 
21.1 
14.8 
19.2 
37.0 
20. f 
10.7 
21.7 
30.4 
20.0 
37.3 
21.4 
27.6 
43.6 
13.0 
16.7 
26.4 



24.9 



I Includes 1 not reporting race. 



In considering the various races it is found that in seven the pro- 
portion of prisoners committed before they had been three years in 
the country exceeds one-fourth of the number reporting. In three 
of these the proportion exceeds one- third, the largest proportion being 
that of the Kussian, or 43.6 per cent; the second in ranlk that of the 
Magyars, or 37.3 per cent; and the third that of the Greek, or 37 



Digitized by 



Google 



200 



The ImmigratioD Gmmittioii. 



per cent. The four other races haTinjg proportions mater than 25 
per cent are the South Italian, Canadian other thui FJrench, Polish, 
and Slovak. 

While the number of prisoners committed within three years after 
their arrival in this country comprises more than one-fourth of the 
number reporting in the case of only seven races, it equals one-fifth or 
more in 13 of the 22 race groups. In addition to the seven already 
enumerated, these races are the North Italian, Mexican, Finnish, 
Hebrew, Croatian, and Lithuanian. 

Further than this, the above table shows that in the case of eveiy 
race except one the prisoners whose commitment for offenses of per- 
sonal violence occurred within three years after their arrival in the 
United States comprise more than 10 per cent of the number report- 
ing years. The single exception is the Chinese race, of whose 56 alien 
prisoners reporting vears only 3, or 5.4 per cent, belonged to the ' ^ess 
than three years'' class. 

OFFBNSES AGAINST PUBUG POLIOT. 

Of aUen prisoners whose crimes consisted of offenses against public 
policy 3,651 reported years in the United States; 749 of these, or 
20.5 per cent, arrived in the coimtry less than three years previous 
to their commitment to the penal institution in which they were found. 

Table 114. — Aliens in prison for offenses against public policy who had been in the 
United States less than thru years prior to commitment, by race: United States, 1908. 

[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalkatlon.] 



Race. 


Number 
reporting 
years in 
United 
States. 


In United States less 
than 3 years prior to 
commlbnent. 




Number. 


Percent. 


AMcan 


23 

179 

129 

18 

33 

261 

52 

31 

817 

32 

190 

862 

45 

894 

54 

72 

88 

344 

36 

165 

108 

111 


6 
19 
34 

2 
14 
50 

8 

4 

60 
19 
87 
40 
11 
118 
17 
27 
18 
121 
14 
28 
29 
40 


26.1 


Oanfidift»i,^rpn'*h . . . .. 


10.0 


Canadian, Other .......... . . . .... ...x... 


18.0 


Chinese.. 


11.1 


Croatian 


42.4 


English 


19. S 


Finnish 


15.4 


French 


12.9 


Qerman 


18.9 


Greek 


50.4 


Hebrew 


19.5 


Irish 


5.4 


ItaUan, North 


84.4 


Italian, South 


29.9 


lithuanian 


8L5 


Magyar 


37.5 


Mexican 


20.5 


Polish 


35.S 


Rn-i*sian , . . , , , . . 


38.9 


Scandinavian 


17.0 


Scotch 


96.9 


Slovak 


36.0 






Total 


8,651 


740 


20.5 







The Greeks contributed 32 prisoners to the number reporting years, 
of whom 19, or 59.4 per cent, were imprisoned within three years 
after arrival. The next latest proportion of prisoners whose pmod 
of residence in the United States pnor to commitment was less than 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



201 



three years is that of the Croatians. This proportion, however, is 
considerably less than that of the Greeks, being 42.4 per cent. Third' 
in rank is the proportion of the Russians, which is 38.9 per cent. In 
the Magyar, Slovak, and Polish groups the niimber committed within 
three years after arrival exceeds one-third of the nimiber reporting, 
while m the Lithuanian, South Italian, Scotch, and African groups it 
exceeds one-fourth, and in every group except the French, Chinese, 
French-Canadian, and Irish it exceeds one-fifth. 

Only one race has a smaller proportion than 10 per cent. This is 
the Insh, but 5.4 per cent of the alien prisoners of this race who 
reported years in the United States having been here less than three 
years at time of their conunitment. 

OFFENSES AGAINST CHASTnT. 

In the following table similar data are shown concerning prisoners 
whose crimes were against chastity. 

Tablb 115. — Aliens in prison for offenses against chastity who had been in the United 
Stales leu than thru years prior to commitment, by race: United States, 1908. 



[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization.] 




Race. 


Number 
reporting 
years in 
XJnlted 
States. 


In United States leas 
than 3 years prior to 
commitment. 




Number. 


Percent. 


African. 


6 
20 
13 

2 


2 
8 
8 


88.8 


Canadian, Fron<?h 


15.0 


Oanftdfftn] Other , ...-...- r - ...... - - 


23.1 


ChipAj^k _ , , , ,...., 


.0 


Croatian , 




.0 


Enelish 


88 

7 
10 
47 

5 

44 
83 

7 
87 

2 
14 
18 
26 

4 
11 

9 
12 


4 

2 

4 
6 
1 
8 
5 
5 
21 


10.5 


Finnish ■ 


28.6 


French 


40.0 


German 


12.8 


Qreelc 


20.0 


Hebrew 


18.2 


Irish 


15.2 


Italian. North 


71.4 


Tt«)if|ii, flonth ..... 


24.1 


T/ithiianian ...r 


.0 


Hagyw. . r 


2 
3 
8 
2 


14.8 


Mexican 


23.1 


Polish 


80.8 


Russian 


60.0 


fioand'naviftn. , . , r - . ,-,„,..,. 


.0 


Scotch 


2 
2 


22.2 


SloYiitr. 


16.7 






Total 


427 


90 


21.1 







Of the 427 prisoners who reported years in the United States, 90, 
or 21.1 per cent, belonged to the class whose incarceration occurred 
within tnree years after their arrival. Among the 22 races shown, 
the North Itahan stands out most prominently in its proportion or 
prisoners whose period of residence in the United States at the time 
of commitment had been less than three years. Of prisoners belong- 
ing to this race, 7 reported years in the United States, of whom 5, 
or 71.4 per cent, were imprisoned within three years of the date oi 
their arrival. The second proportion in rank is that of the Russians, 

79340'— VOL Se— 11 ^14 



Digitized by 



Google 



202 



The Immigration Commission. 



being 50 per cent, while the third is that of the French, or 40 per 
cent. The small numbers, however, upon which these percentages 
are based somewhat detract from their value as means of comparmg 
the races, for there are only 7 North Italians reporting years, 4 Rus- 
sians, and 10 French. 

Indeed, in none of the race groups is the number of prisoners com- 
mitted for offenses against chastity large as compared with the num- 
ber committed for other kinds of crime. 'One race, the Croatian, 
contributes no aUen prisoners to the number under sentence for 
offenses against chastity, while there are no alien prisoners of the 
Chinese, Lithuanian, and Scandinavian races whose commitments for 
such offenses occurred within three years after their arrival in the 
United States. 

SUMMABT.BT GLASSES OF CRIBOB. 

A ready means of summarizing this comparison of the various 
races with respect to alien prisoners committed to penal institutions 
before they had been three years in the United States is afforded by 
the following table. This table shows for each class of crime the 
percentage which those prisoners whose commitments occurred within 
three years after arrival forms of the total number of prisoners re- 
porting years in the United States. 

Table 116. — Per cent^ of aliens in j^rison for each class of crime who had been in the 
United States less than three years pnor to commitment, by race: United States, 1908. 

f Compiled from data of Bureaa of Immigration and NaturalUation.l 



Race. 


Gainful 
offenses. 


Offenses 

of 
personal 
violence. 


Offenses 
against 
public 
policy. 


Ofleoses 
against 
chastity. 


African 


14.3 
23.6 
32.0 
.0 
51.8 
20.5 
22.0 
31.0 
18.6 
32.8 
22.5 
12.9 
27.4 
28.7 
21.6 
.39.0 
26.5 
36.4 
43.3 
13.4 
16.8 
37.8 


14.3 
14.9 
28.1 
5.4 
20.8 
10.1 
21.1 
14.8 
19.2 
37.0 
20.9 
10.7 
21.7 
30.4 
20.0 
37.3 
21.4 
27.6 
43.6 
13.0 
16.7 
26.4 


26.1 
10.6 
18.6 
11. 1 
42.4 
19.2 
15.4 
12.0 
18.9 
59.4 
19.5 
5.4 
24.4 
29.9 
31.5 
37.5 
20.5 
35.2 
3S.9 
17.0 
26.9 
36.0 


83.3 


Canadian, French 


15.0 


Canadian. Other 


23.1 


Chinese 





PrnfttMin , , 


.0 


English 


10.5 


Finnish 


2&« 


French 


40.0 


(}ernian 


12.8 


Greek 


20.0 


Hebrew 


18.2 


Irish :. 


15.2 


Italian. North 


71.4 


Italian. South 


24.1 


I^ithuanian 





Magyar 


14. S 


Mexican 


28.1 


Polish 


30.8 


Russian 


50.0 


Scandinavian 


.0 


Scotch 


22.2 


Slovak 


16.7 







a Based on number reporting years In the United States. 

It appears from this table that while the proportion exceeds 25 
per cent for one or more classes of crime in fifteen races, in only two 
does it exceed this percentage for each of the four classes of crime 
shown. These two races are the Russian and the Polish. Of Russian 
alien prisoners reporting years in the United States who were under 
sentence for gainful offenses, 43.3 per cent were committed within 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 203 

three years after arrival in the country; of those convicted of offenses 
of personal violence, 43.6 per cent; of offenses against public policy, 
38.9 per cent; and of offenses against chastity, 50 per cent. The 
proportions found in the Polish groups are as follows: Gainful 
offenses, 36.4 per cent; offenses of personal violence, 27.6 per cent; 
offenses against pubUc policy, 35 per cent; and offenses against 
chastity, 30.8 per cent. 

Besides these two races, there are four whose proportions exceed 
25 per cent for three classes of crime. The Greek, South Italian, 
Magyar, and Slovak are these, and in each case the proportions 
greater than 25 per cent are found in the groups of prisoners con- 
victed of offenses of gain, of personal violence, and against public 
policy. 

In five other races the proportion of .prisoners committed within 
three years after their arrival exceeds 25 per cent of the nuniber 
reporting for two classes of crime — in the African, for offenses against 
public policy and against chastity; in the Canadian other than 
Jprench, for offenses of gain and personal violence, in the Croatian, 
for gainful offenses and offenses against public policy; and in the 
French and North Italian, for gaii3ul offenses and offenses against 
chastity. 

Four races have proportions exceeding 25 per cent for one class of 
crime only. These races, and the classes of crime in which such 
proportions occur, are: Finnish, offenses against chastity; Lithu- 
anian and Scotch, offenses against public policy; and Mexican^ 
gainful offenses. 

There are thus only seven races of the twenty-two shown in the ' 
table whose alien prisoners committed for each of the four classes of 
crime within three years after their arrival in the United States 
compose less than one-fourth of the total number committed for the 
same class of crime who reported years in the country. These seven 
races are the French Canadian, Chinese, English, German, Hebrew, 
Irish, and Scandinavian. 

OFFENSES OF SPECIAL OBAVITr. 

A number of the more serious offenses have been selected for 
further analvsis. These offenses are: Abduction and kidnaping, 
violent assault, blackmail and extortion, burglary, homicide, robbery, 
and rape. In the table next submitted prisoners under sentence for 
such onenses have been grouped together by race. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



204 



The Immigration Commission. 



Tablb 117,— Aliens in prison for offenses o/s^fecial gravity o^ who had been in the United 
States less than three years prior to oommxtment, by race: United States, 1908, 



[Compiled from data of Buieaa of Immigration and Nataralltatlon.] 




Race. 


Number 
reporting 

3rearsln 
the United 

Stetes. 


In the United Btatet 
less than 3 years prior 
to commitment. 




Number. 


Percent 


AfHoan 


60 
59 

56 

eo 

41 
242 

53 

52 
348 

47 
150 
125 
162 
976 

34 
107 
452 
234 

42 
122 

66 

81 


5 

n 

14 
2 
15 
38 
12 
18 
60 
13 
25 
12 
33 
283 
6 
87 
102 
79 
1« 
11 
6 
20 


lao 


Canndiftn, French x ... . ....... . 


1&6 


Owfwilan, Other .... . . ^ 


25.0 


nhinA^..; 


3.3 


Croatian 


36.6 


English 


U.7 


Ftnnlgb 


22.6 


French » 


25.0 


Oflrtnan . 


17.2 


Greek 


27.7 


Hebrew 


16w7 


Irish 


9.6 


Italian, North 


21.7 


Italian', South 


29.0 


Lithuanian 


17.6 


Magyar 


34.6 


M^[can 


22.6 


PoiWi 


33.8 


Russian ,. 


38.1 


fV»n'*i'>avian....... . 


9.0 




9.2 


Slovak. 


24-7 






Total 


ft 3. 769 


876 


23.3 







• Abdnetion and kidnaping, violent assault, blackmail and extortion, burglary, homicide, robbery, 
and rape, 
ft Includes 1 not reporting race. 

The total number of alien prisoners confined for these crimes who 
reported years in the United States was 3,769. Of this number, 
876, or 23.2 per cent, had been in the country less than three years 
at the time of their commitment. The largest proportion committed 
within three years after arrival in the United States is found in the 
Russian group, being 38.1 per cent, while the smallest is that of the 
Chinese, or 3.3 per cent. 

In the case of 8 of the 22 races the proportion is 25 per cent or 
more. These races and their proportions are: 

Percent 

Russian 38.1 

Croatian 36.6 

Magyar 34.6 

PoBsh 33.8 

Italian, South 29. 

Greek 27.7 

Canadian (other than French) 25. 

French 25. 

In four other races — the Slovak, Fininsh, Mexican, and North 
Italian — the prisoners whose commitment occurred prior to three 
years of residence in the country compose over one-fifth of the number 
reporting years. Six of the remainmg races have proportions of 10 

{)er cent or more, while only four have less than 10 per cent. The 
atter are the Irish, Scotch, Scandinavian, and Chinese. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



205 



BUBOLABT, HOMICIDE, AND ROBBBBT. 



Of the 876 alien prisoners who had been in the United States less 
than three years prior to commitment for the offenses enumerated in 
the preceding section, 739 were under sentence for burglary, homicide, 
or robbery. 

Burglary. — The total number of alien prisoners convicted of 
burglary was 1,198, of whom 267, or 23.3 per cent, had been in the 
country less than three years at the time of their imprisonment. 



Tablk 118. — Aliens in prison for burglary who had been in the United States less than 
three years prior to commitment^ by race: United StateSf 1908. 



[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigratton and Naturalisation.) 




Race. 


Number 
reporting 
years In 
United 
States. 


In United States less 
than 3 years prior to 
commitment. 




Number. 


Percent. 


Afrtmn r . r . » . r . - - 


9 

25 

24 

3 

9 

124 
11 
26 

180 
10 

108 
68 
18 

188 
11 
28 

181. 

100 
19 
62 
85 
10 




0.0 


Canadian. French 


6 
6 


24.0 


Canadian, other ,..,...,..,.-.,,,...-- ^ --,._,---,--,. ^ ,,.-,. . 


25.0 


Qijnese 


.0 


Croatian 


6 
26 

2 
10 
29 

4 
19 

6 

8 
86 

1 

7 

88- 
88 

9 

6 

8 

2 


66.7 


Bnglish 


20.2 


FiTinbfh ...-,.-,, - - - - 


18.2 


French ". 


88.6 


German r, w,,,t.., 


16.1 


Qnek 


40.0 


Hebrew 

Irlah 


18.4 
7.9 


ItaliaiL North 


16.7 


TtalHin, Rnnth . 


26.8 


liitiinantan 


9.1 


liarrar 


30.4 


l^Sean 


26.7 


Polish 


38.0 


iinf^ffHui 


47.4 


fV^nHii^^vian , 


8.1 


Scotch 


8.6 


fll<yyalr 


20.0 






Total 


1,198 


267 


22.S 







While only 6 of those whose incarceration occurred before they 
had resided three years in tile United States were of the Croatian 
race, this number comprised two-thirds of the total number of that 
race reporting years. This is a congiderablr larger proportion than 
is found in any of the other race groups; tne second in rank bein^ 
the Russian, which is 47.4 per cent, while the Greek proportion is 
40 per cent, the French, 38.5 per cent, and the Polish, 33 per cent. 

No prisoners of the African or Chinese races are found among those 
committed for burglary before they had been three years m the 
country, while of flie Irish prisoners umder sentence for bui^lary 
only 7.9 per cent beloi^ed to this class. 

Homicide.—^ the auen prisoners committed for homicide, 1,524 
reported years in the United States. Of this number, 36i, or 24 
per cent, had been committed before they had resided tnree years in 
the country. Among six of the races the proportion of those whose 
period of residence prior to commitment was less than three years 
exceeds one-fourth of the number reporting. 



Digitized by 



Googl 



206 



The Immigratioii Commission. 



Tablx 119.— Alitru in prison for homicide who had been in the United States U$t than 
three years prior to commitment, by race: United States, 1908. 



[Compiled from dmta of Bnreaa of Immigntioii and NfttimUi 


Atkm.] 




lUc*. 


Nmnber 
reporting 
years in 
United 
States. 


In United States less 
than Syears prior to 
oommitment. 




Number. 


Percent. 


African 


25 
17 
15 
37 
23 
65 
32 
11 
VJ 
15 
13 
25 
83 

617 
10 
60 

206 
80 
13 
27 
11 
fiO 


4 
2 
3 
1 
4 
7 
6 
2 
17 
4 
1 
3 
18 
156 
5 
21 
.40 
» 
6 
8 
2 
10 


15.4 


'^ftnft'Jiin, Frwifohx.. . ... . ..... ........ ..... ............. 


11. « 


CAntuM^xi'^ Qth^r T 


30.0 


Chinese..' 


2.7 


Croatian , 


17.4 


English ! 


12.7 


Finnish 


18.8 


French 


18.2 


0«mmn...,.,....,..a., ... . . . . 


17.5 


Greek 


26.7 


Hebrew 


7.7 


Irish 


12.0 


Italian, North 


21.7 


Italian, South 


sao 


Lithuanian 


26.3 


Magyar 


35.6 


Mexican 


19.4 


Polish 


22.6 


Russian 


38.5 


»c<Mi(1inayian. 


11.1 


Scotch 


18.2 


Slovak 


20.0 






Total 


• 1,524 


365 


M.0 







A Includes 1 not reporting 

The greatest proportion is that of the Russian group, being 38.5 
per cent. The other five races whose proportions exceed 25 per cent 
are the Magyar (35.6 per cent), PoUsh (32.5 per cent). South Italian 
(30 per cent), Greek (26.7 per cent), and Lithuanian (26.3 per cent). 
The Chinese contribute 37 prisoners to the number reporting years, 
but only 1 to the number committed within three years after arrival. 
The Chmese proportion is therefore only 2.7 per cent, or considerably 
less than that of any other race; the next in rank being the Hebrew, 
which is 7.7 per cent. With the exception of the Oiinese and Hebrew 
all of the races have over iO per cent. 

In descending order of percentage the 22 races stand as follows 
with respect to aUen prisoners committed for homicide before they 
had been three years in the United States. 



Per cent. 

Russian 38.5 

Magyar 35. 6 

Polish 32.5 

Italian, South 30.0 

Greek 26.7 

Lithuanian 26. 3 

Italian, North 21.7 

Canadian, Other 20. 

Slovak 20.0 

Mexican 19. 4 

Finnish 18.8 



Percent. 

French 18.2 

Scotch 18.2 

German 17. 5 

Croatian 17.4 

African .' 15. 4 

English 12. 7 

Irish 12.0 

Canadian, French 11.8 

Scandinavian 11. 1 

Hebrew 7.7 

Chinese 2.7 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



207 



Robbery. — ^Among two raceS; the Chinese and Lithuanian, no alien 
prisoners were found under sentence for robbery who had been in the 
United States less than three years at the time of commitment, while 
among eight of the races only 1 such prisoner appeared. In all, 107| 
or 23.1 per cent of the 463 prisoners convicted of robbery who re- 
ported years in the United States had been in the country less than 
three years prior to commitment. 

The latest proportion is that of the Finns, 2 of whom reported 
years, and both of these having been oommitted within three years 
after arrival. Second in rank is tlie proportion of the Croatian, or 
75 per cent, there beins 4 prisoners of this race who reported years, 
of whom 3 had resided in the country less than three years when 
imprisoned. 

Table 120. — Aliem in prison for robbery who had been in the United States less than 
three years prior to commitment, by race: United States, 1908, 



[Compiled from data of Bureau of Immigration and Natoralisation.] 




Race. 


Number 
reporting 
years in 
TJnlted 
States. 


III United States less 
than 3 years prior to 




Number. 


Per cent. 


African 


10 
36 

84 

16 
23 
18 
153 

3 
10 
33 
19 

3 

18 
12 
12 




11 1 


Canadian, French ....... . . 


14.3 


Canft^ilftni Other ...••• . .. 


40.0 


Chinese 


.0 


Croatian .,.,. ... ... 


46 


76.0 


English 


11 1 


Pinnfi^h.... . ... ... ... 


100.0 


French 


16.7 


German 


20.6 


Greek 


16.7 


Hebrew 


6.7 


Irish. 


13.0 


Ttaliaii, ^nrth . „. . 


33.3 


Italian! South 


29 4 


Lithuanian 


.0 


Magyar 


2 
10 
6 

1 
1 
1 
2 


20.0 


SSSm. ::::::::;;::::::::;::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::: 


30.3 


Polish 


31.6 


Russian 


33 3 


S^*»n<ilnAviAn , , ^ . . 


6.6 


Sootch. 


8 3 


Uovak. 


16.7 






Total 


463 


107 


23 I 







The largest number of alien prisoners committed for robbery 
within three years after their arrival in the United States were of 
the South Italian race; but these comprise only 29.4 per cent of the 
total number under sentence for this crime who reported years, or a 
smaller proportion than that found in six other race groups. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Chapter XII. 

CEirSTJS DATA ON CRIME. 

An investigation of the effect of immigration upon crime in the 
United States would not be complete without some survey of the 
data on crime gathered by the Census Bureau. The 1904 Report on 
Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions contains material 
which throws additional light. on the criminahty of immigrants as 
compared with the criminality of native Americans. This material 
concerns (1) all prisoners enumerated on June 30, 1904; (2) all 
prisoners committed to penal institutions during the calendar year 
1904; (3) all juvenile delinquents enumerated in institutions on 
June 30, 1904; and (4) all juvenile delinquents committed to institu- 
tions during the calendar year 1904. 

1. Pbisonebs Enxtmbbatbd June 30, 1904. 

NATIVITT. 

The enumeration of prisoners in 1904 waa made on June 30. On 
that date 81,772 persons were found in pensd institutions throughout 
the United States. This number did not include juvenile delinquents, 
of whom a separate enumeration waa made. Of the 81,772 prisoners 
enumerated, 26,661 were colored, 26,087 of these being negroes. A 
trifle more than two-thirds of the prisoners enumerated (55,111, or 
67.4 per cent) were white persons. As practically all the immigrant 
prisoners were whites, discussion may be confinea to this group, and 
comparisons made of immigrants and natives of the same color. 

Or the 55,111 white prisoners, only 436 were of unknown nativity. 
Therefore the exclusion of these from the figures upon which per- 
centages are baaed does not greatly alter the percentages, whil^ it 
renders them more accurate for piuposes of comparison. 

In Table 121 is shown the per cent distribution, by nativity, of the 
white ])risoners of known nativity enumerated on June 30, 1904 — 
54,675 in number. In this table is also presented the per cent dis- 
tribution, by nativity, of the general white population of the country, 
10 years of age and over, as enumerated in 1900. 

209 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



210 



The Immigratioii Commission. 



Tabls 121,— Per cent dutribuUon of while pfiionen enumerated June SO, 1904, and of 

fenerdl white population 10 years of age and over, 1900, by nativity and by States and 
territories. 



State or Territory. 


White prisoners of 
known natiyity 
enumeratea 
June 80, 1904. 


General white pop- 
ulation 10 years 
of age and oven 
1900. 




Percent 
native. 


Percent 

fbielgn- 

bom* 


Percent 

native. 


Percent 

foreign. 

bom. 


Contin^tAl TTnltft'f st*it«w 


78.8 


28.7 


sas 


19.6 






North Atlantic division 


67.3 


S2.7 


71.7 


38.S 






Metnp , 


74.3 
71.9 
82.1 
61.1 
64.6 
65.7 
6«.0 
63.8 
73.2 

93.5 


35.7 
28.1 
17.9 
88.9 
85.4 
84.S 
32.0 
86.2 
26.8 

6.6 


84.2 
76.2 
84.5 
63.6 
61.7 
67.7 
67.7 
70.4 
79.7 

96.9 


l&S 


Nflw TTfimpehlre , . , 


24.8 


Vermont . .* 


1&6 


MlMI!«KJl"flett8 


36.5 


RhodA J^\v\*\ ...' 


3S.S 


Connecticut 


S2.3 


New York 


32.3 


New Jersey 


39.6 


'Pennffylytunia 


30l3 


ftmth Atlantic d<vl«rlAn 


4.1 






Delawire 


(•) 
86.8 

(•) 
97.3 
93.1 
99.2 
97.9 
96.8 
86.4 

84.0 


6.9 
.8 

2.1 

1.7 

13.6 

16.0 


88.9 
87.6 
87.9 
97.9 
96.7 
99.5 
. 98.7 
98.6 
91.4 

79.4 


ILl 


w^rylwid .... 


12.4 


pfiTtHr^ rtf rVHrnnhlft 


13.1 


Vlrglnlii 


3.1 


WAfitVlr^nift . 


8.3 


Noith f!ftifoHna- , „ , , 


.5 


flniith Pftrotinfi , _ 


1.3 


Georcla 


1.4 


Florida 


8.6 


North Central division 


30.6 






Ohio 


85.3 
94.0 
80.7 
75.9 
70.3 
69.0 
87.5 
90.8 
65.2 
74.2 
84.7 
96.4 

89.5 


14.7 
6.0 
19.3 
24.1 
29.7 
31.0 
12.5 
9.2 
84.8 
25.8 
15.8 
3.6 

las 


85.9 
92.7 
74.0 
71.8 
67.2 
61.5 
82.2 
90.4 
51.6 
68.9 
77.9 
88.4 

95.1 


14.1 


TndiAn^ , 


7 3 


Illinois 


26.0 


Michigan 


313 


Wisconsin 


82.8 


Ulnniv^^, 


SS.S 


Iowa 


17.8 


Missouri 


9.6 


North Dakota 


48.4 


South Dakota 


81.1 


Nebraska 


32.1 


Elansas 


11.6 


South Central division 


4.6 






Kentucky 


98.7 
98.2 
96.3 
96.5 
92.3 
79.8 


1.8 
1.8 
8.7 
8.5 
7.7 
20.2 


96.4 
98.5 
98.0 
98.4 
90.4 

oai 


3.6 


Tennessee .... .. 


1.5 


Alabama 


2.0 


Mississippi 


1.6 


Louisiana 


9.6 


Texas 


9.6 


Indian Terrilory 




Oklahoma 


94.8 
74.9 


25.1 


94.2 
97.9 

76.4 


6.3 


Arkansas 


2.1 


Western division 


31.6 






Montana 


72.8 
86.7 
81.5 
81.4 
50.2 
78.8 

73.2 
73.2 
85.8 
73.4 


27.2 
13.8 
18.5 
18.6 
49.8 
21.2 
(•) 
26.8 
26.8 
14.2 
36.6 


65.6 
76.3 
78.6 
90.3 

7ai 

78.0 
70.7 
81.0 
74.3 
82.9 
72.7 


84.5 


Wyoming 


28.7 


Colorado 


21.4 


New Mexico 


9.7 


Arizona 


29.9 


Utah 


27 


Nevada 


29.3 


Idaho 


19 


Wftuhington . . 


26.8 


Oregon." 


17.1 


CaUlomia 


87.3 







• Per cent not shown where base la less than lOQi 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 211 

In the United States at large nearly one-fourth (23.7 per cent) 
of the white prisoners were immigrants. In the five geographical 
divisions of tne coimtry, however, the proportion varied greatly. 
Inunigrants composed but 6.5 per cent, or approximately one- 
fifteenth, of the white prisoners enumerated in the South Atlantic 
States. On the other hand, nearly one-third (32.7 per cent) of the 
white prisoners in the North Atlantic States were immi^ants. The 
range of distribution of prisoners of native and foreign birth is wider 
vet in the individual States. Of the white prisoners enumerated in 
rJorth Carolina 0.8 per cent were foreign-bom, while of those enu- 
merated in Arizona 49.8 per cent were foreign-bom. This means that 
in North Carolina there was 1 inmiigrant in every 125 white pris- 
oners and that in Arizona there were 62 immigrants in every 125 
white prisoners. Betwelen these two extremes Ue all other States in 
proportion of inmiigrants among their white prisoners. In five of 
these other States immigrants composed over one-third of the white 
prisoners. Four of these were States of the North Atlantic division, 
m which division every State except Vermont had a larger propor- 
tion than 25 per cent of immigrants in its total of white prisoners. 

Such figures as these show the presence of the immigrant in the 
prison population. They fail, however, to indicate the relative 
criminality of immigrants and natives. As the prison population 
may be largely determined by the character of the general popula- 
tion, the representation of immigrants in the prison population must 
be compared with their representation in the general population 
before much can be determined regarding the quantity of unmigrant 
crime. Such representation of immigrants in the general population 
of 1900 is shown in the right-hand colxmm of the preceding table. 
Here only persons 10 years of age or over are included in the figures 
in order that the presence of a large nimiber of children under 10 
years among the native whites and an extremely small nimiber among 
the immigrant whites may not produce percentages that are mani- 
festly unfair to the immigrant.* 

According to the figures shown, inmiigrants were more in evidence 
in the prison population than in the general population. That is, 
if the percentages given in Table 121 may be taken to represent 
comparable things, immigrants contributed to the prison class in 
excess of their representation in the general population. If this was 
true, immigrants were more criminal (quantitatively) than natives. 

» If the ^neral population of all ages be taken, the basis for the comparison will 
not be equitable for several reasons. Inmates of the general prisons are all at least 
10 years of age and nearly all over 16. For the most part the immigrants are between 
15 and 40 years of a^e. The nimiber of children under 10 years of age is extremely 
small among the white immigrants as compared with the native whites. In view of 
these facts a comparison of the proportions of each nativity class in the white prison 
population with the corresponding proportions of the general population of all ages 
would clearly be unfair, for the inclusion of children under 10 years of age would so 
increase the proportion of natives in the ^neral population that it would seem as if 
crime were more prevalent among the foreign-bom as compared with the native white 
than is actually the case. Therefore children under 10 years of age are omitted, and 
the figures given for the general population in Table VII ([shown above as Table 121) 
refer only to those at least 10 years of age. Even with this exclusion the figures are, 
on the whole, less favorable to the foreign-bom white prisoners than the facts warrant, 
as no account could be taken of the large immigration between 1900 and 1904. — Pris- 
oners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions : 1904. Bureau of the Census, pp.18-19. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



212 



The Immigration Commission. 



Yet a further analysis of the figures suggests the possible error of 
such a conclusion. While it is true that lor the country as a whole, 
and for four of the five geographical divisions as units, the foreign- 
bom formed a larger percentage of the prison population than of 
the general population 10 years of age or over, in 21 mdividual States 
such was not the case. Moreover^ 10 of these States were in geo- 
graphical divisions which as divisions showed the excess of immi- 
grant prison representation over immigrant population representa- 
tion. Such conflict of evidence makes doubtful the accuracy of the 
basis of comparison. 

Indeed the Census Report admits that — 

in some respects * * * a comparison with the total white population 10 years of 
ace and over is hsuxily fair to the foreign-bom. Very few prisoners are under the age 
of 15, and the great majority of prisoners, 94.5 per cent of the total number, are males. 
Therefore it is perhaps more significant when the percentage of foreign-bom among 
white prisoners is compared with the percentage of foreign-bom in the white popu- 
lation 16 years of age and over, classified by sex.a 

Then follows in the Census Report this table: 





Per cent foreign-bom— 


DlTlslon. 


Among white 
prisoners of 

known nativ- 
ity enumer- 
ated June 
ao,1904. 


In the genera! white popula- 
tion 16 years of age and 
over, 1900. 




Total. 


Male. 


Femak. 


CoDtlnaital United States 


23.7 


21.9 


23.0 


20.7 






North Atlantic. 


32.7 
«.6 
16.0 
10.6 
25.1 


30.8 
4.8 

23.3 
6.6 

27.4 


31.8 
6.3 

24.8 
6.2 
29.8 


29.8 


Ar>nth Atlantic - ,.,.,... r-r. 


4.S 


North Central 


21.8 


fioath Central 


6.9 


Western 


24.1 







Commenting thereon, the Census Report says: 

The figures presented above rive little support to tile popular belief that the foreign- 
bom contribute to the prison cIass greatly in excess of tneir representation in the gen- 
eral population. Of the three divisions in which the foreign-bom are of great impor- 
tance, Ihe North Atlantic is the only one where the foreign-bom are relatively more 
numerous among the white prisoners than in the general white population. In thi* 
division they form 30.8 per cent of the general white population at least 15 years of age 
and 32.7 per cent of the white prisoners. In the Norm Central States, on the other 
hand, the corresponding percentages are 23.3 for the general population, as contrasted 
with only 16 per cent for the prisoners. As no allowance has been made for the great 
influx of foreign-bom since 1900. which affects chiefly the North Atlantic division, the 
figures can not be regarded as indicating a greater criminal tendency among the foreign- 
bom whites than amon^ the native. These conclusions are generally substantiated 
by the figures for the prisoners committed during 1904. a 

Now even this comparison is open to criticism. The new table was 
compiled in order that justice might be done the immigrant in the 
figures. Yet after stating that the great majority of prison^v, 
94.5 per cent of the total number, are males/' no separation of the 
sexes was made in the percentages of prisoners, although such a sepa- 
ration Vas made in the percentages of population. That this some- 
what detracts from the accuracy of the comparison is evident when 

a Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 19. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



213 



it is discovered that 8.5 per cent of the white immigrant prisoners were 
females and only 4.1 per cent of the white native prisoners.^ The 
percentage of immigrants in the total body of prisoners is therefore 
^eater than in the male portion only; yet it is with the percentage of 
immigrants in the male portion of the population that it is compared. 
While the number of female prisoners is too small for their exclusion 
to make great changes in the percentages, it is interesting to note the 
differences, especially as they suggest the necessity of taking every 
factor into consideration in comparing the criminaUty of inunigrants 
and natives. 





Per cent forelgn-bom— 


DhrWoQ. 


Among white 
prisoners of known 
nativity enumerated 

June 30, 1004. 


In the 
general 

white 
popula* 
lion 16 
years of 
age and 
oyer,1900L 




Total. 


Male. 


Male. 


Continental United States 


23.7 


22.6 


23.0 






North Atlantic 


32.7 
6.5 
16.0 
10.6 
25.1 


31.1 
5.9 
16.1 
10.5 
25.0 


81.8 


South Atlantic 


5.8 


North Central 


24.8 


South Central 


6 2 


Western 


20.8 







The changes which the new oercentages (of male prisoners) make 
in the comparison are not great, out they are ^ilightemng. When total 
prison population was compared with male- general population, the 
figures moicated that the foreign-bom contributed to the prison class 
slightly in excess of its representation in the population; this appeared 
true, not only for the country as a whole, but for the North Atlantic, 
the South Atlantic, and the South Central divisions as units. The 
inclusion of the North Atlantic division among those in which the 
immigrant appeared imduly represented in the prison population lent 
importance to the fact, for in this division were enumerated 61.4 per 
cent of all the white immigrant prisoners. 

When the prisoners are classined by sex, however, and the repre- 
sentation of the foreign-bom in the male prison population is com- 
pared with their representation in the general male population 15 
years of age and over it is found that the immigrant is more in evidence 
m the prison population than in the general population only in the 
two Southern groups of States. And it is in these States that fewest 
immigrant prisoners were enumerated — 627 of the 12,945 in the coun- 
try. In the North Atlantic States, where the majority of the immi- 
grant prisoners were enumerated, immigrants composed 31.1 per cent 
of the white male prisoners and 31.8 per cent of the white male popula- 
tion 15 years of age or over. In the United States as a whole 22.6 per 
cent of the white male prisoners were immigrants and 23 of the 
white male population at least 15 years of age. The census of prison- 

<»Pri8onera and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 16 (Table V.) 



Digitized by 



Google 



214 



The Immigration Commission. 



ers therefore gives no reason for believing iminigrant crime relatively 
^eater in quantity in 1904 than native cnme; in fact the figures make 
it appear somewhat less.<» And this does not take into consideration 
the probably more favorable showing which the foreign-bom would 
make were the population figures those of 1904 instead of 1900. 

Another comparison that is of interest, and not without value, is 
that of difference in the proportions of immigrant and native prison- 
ers in 1890 and 1904. The figures for the two years are as follows: 





White prisoners of known nativity. 


DlTlsloo. 


Fer cent native. 


Per cent foreign- 
bom. 




1904. 


1890. 


1904. 


1890. 


Continental United SUtes 


76.3 


71.8 


23.7 


28.3 






North Atlantic 


67.3 
93.5 
84.0 
89.5 
74.9 


65.6 
89.6 
76.4 
83.9 
67.2 


32.7 
6.5 
16.0 
10.5 
25.1 


34.4 


South Atlantic 


10.4 


North Central 


23.6 


South Central 


16.2 


Western 


32.8 







The striking feature of these figures is that they show the propor- 
tion of immigrant prisoners to have decreased. In 1904 a smaller 
percentage of the white prisoners were inmiigrants than in 1890. 
The fiigures show this to have been true not only in the United States 
at large but in each of the five geographical divisions. The corrollary 
to this fact of decreased proportion of immigrant prisoners is increased 
proportion of native prisoners. In 1904 native prisoners formed in 
every division of the United States a larger percentage of the total 
number of white prisoners than in 1890. 

The result of the enumeration of prisoners on June 30, 1904, was, 
if the figures and the foregoing interpretation of them are correct, 
to show that, in quantity at least, immigrant crime was relatively less 
important than native crime, and that m the 14 years lying between 
the enumerations of 1890 and 1904 immigrant crime had decreased 
in relative amoimt, while native crime had correspondingly increased. 

MAJOR AND MINOR OFFENDERS. 

The Questions then arise, In what ways did immigrant and native 
criminality differ quaUtatively ? What was the nature of the crimes 
of iminigrants and of those of natives? A classification of prisoners 
of native and of foreign birth according to the character of their 
offenses might therefore add to the meaning of the figures just 
shown. Such a classification has been made in Table 122, which 
shows the percentage of major and minor offenders among the 
prisoners of each nativity enumerated on June 30, 1904. * 'Major" 
and ''minor*' are here used to indicate the relative gravity of the 
offenses for which the prisoners were incarcerated. They do not 

« Only immigrants and natives being considered in a body of prisoners of known 
nativity, a less representation of immigrants in the prison population than in the gen- 
eral population means a greater representation of natives. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



S15 



afford exact measures of criminality, for to determine whether one 
offense is more serious than another is not always possible. But %s 
a general characterization of crime they are perhaps apt enough to 
make valuable the separation of prisoners that they here effect.** 

Table 122. — Per cent of major and minor offender among prisoners enumerated JuneSO^ 
190 i, classifieaby color and nativity ^ and by main geographic divisions. 





Per cent distribution of prisoners enumerated June 30 1004. 


Oeographlo division and 
class of offenders. 


Aggre- 
gate. 


White. 


Colored. 


Total 


Native. 


For- 
eign- 
bom. 


Nativ- 
ity un- 
known. 


Total. 


Negro. 


Mon- 
golian. 


Indian. 


Continental United States. . . 


loao 


loao 


loao 


loao 


loao 


loao 


loao 


loao 


loao 


M^Jor offenders 


72.6 
72.5 


67.1 
32.9 


7a 3 
29.7 

loao 


58.3 
41.7 


24.3 

7&7 


83.7 
1&3 

loao 


83.8 
1&2 


77.9 
22.1 


76.0 


Minor offenders,,, ....... 


240 






North Atlantic 


100.0 


100.0 


loao 


(«) 


loao 


(«) 


(•) 




M^r offenders 

Minor offenders 

Soath AUantio 


55.0 
4&0 

loao 


53.2 
4&8 

loao 


56.2 
43.8 

100.0 


47.3 
52.7 

loao 


loao 


68.8 
31.2 

loao 


6&8 
31.2 

loao 


(•) 






M^}or offenders 

Minor offenders 


82.0 
l&O 

loao 


72.3 
27.7 

loao 


75.1 
24.9 

loao 


74 6 
3&4 

loao 


38.0 
62.0 

loao 


8&4 

14 6 

loao 


85w4 
14 6 

100.0 


(•) 


(•) 


North Central 


(«) 


loao 






Minor offenders 

South Central 


77.2 
22.8 

loao 


76.5 
23.5 

loao 


7&1 
21.9 

loao 


72.8 
27.2 

loao 


6.8 
93.2 

(•) 


sao 
2ao 

loao 


sai 

19.9 
100.0 


« 


79.7 
2a8 

(•) 




Major offenders 

Minor offenders 

Western 


8a8 

11.2 

loao 


8&3 
11.7 

loao 


88.0 
12.0 

loao 


91.9 
6.1 

loao 


'"(a)" 
(•) 


88.9 

11.1 
loao 


89.0 
11.0 

loao 


loao 


loao 






Major offenders 

Minor offenders 


77.7 
22.3 


7&1 
21.9 


7&8 
21.2 


76.3 
23.7 


(•) 


741 
25.9 


73.2 
2&8 


7&4 
21.6 


71. « 
2&8 



• Per cent not shown where biise is less than lOOi 

In all sections of the country major offenders were more numerous 
among the native white prisoners than miaor offenders. In each 
geographical division except the North Atlantic the same was also 
true of white prisoners oi foreign birth. In the North Atlantic 
States, however, major offenders composed only 47.3 per cent of 
all white immigrant prisoners, while minor offenders composed 52.7 
per cent. It is true that in this group of States major and minor 
offenders were more evenly distributed among native prisoners 
than in any other section of the coimtry, but the former were here, as 
elsewhere, the more numerous, composing 56.2 per cent of the total 

a All crimes that are universally held to be of a grave nature, regardless of how they 
happen to be punished in indiN^idual instances, have invariably been classed as major 
offenses. Among them are the most aggravated forms of offenses against chastity, as 
enumerated in Table 4; perjury, counterfeiting, and various violations of the United 
States laws; all the specified crimes apiinst the person; and arson, burglary, forgery, 
and embezzlement among the specified crimes against property. The rule has been 
followed by classifying larceny and a number of other offenses, which may or may not 
be of a serious nature, as minor offenses when the term of imprisonment was not for 
more than one year.— Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutiona: 1904, p. 28. 



Digitized by 



Google 



216 



The Immigratioa Commlssioii. 



number of native white prisoners as opposed to the minor oflfendeis, 
who fonned only 43.8 per cent. There was evident a tendency in 
this geographical division to a greater proportion of minor offenders 
than in any other part of the country. The census explanation of 
the excess of minor offenders over major offenders among the foreim- 
bom prisoners is probably the true one — ''the concentration of the 
foreign-bom in uroan communities where minor offenses are severely 
pimished." 

On the other hand, the presence of a large part of the native 
population in rural commumties, where minor offenses are relatively 
less common and less severely punished, tends to make the propor- 
tion of major offenders in that group of prisoners exceed the minor. 

With the exception of the North Atlantic States the major offenders 
outnumbered the minor offenders amon^ the inmiigrant as well as 
among the native prisoners in all sections of the country. Such 
excess of the major offenders was greatest in the South Central States, 
as is shown by tnese figures: 



Geognphlo diviflioa and oUbb of oflendcn. 


white. 


Pordpi 
white. 


North Atlantic: 

MftJ<M'offpndflr8....x*x.*.*..x...... 


56.2 
43.8 

76,1 
91.9 

78.1 
2L9 

88.0 
12.0 

78.8 
21.2 


47. S 


Minor offenders.. l.I.m^.. ..I '. 


a.7 


BoDth Atlantic: 

Major offenders 


74. • 


mixnr'^^n^mt.'.W.V.V.'... '.,.,.... v. 


25.4 


North Central: 

Major offenders ^ 


72.8 
27.3 


Sonth Central: 

Major offenders, ..................,.........,*.*,........ ..x.-r-T-r 


91.9 


Minor offenders 


8.1 


Western: 

Major offenders.. .....■..•••••••••••...•.•...•.•.••••.•••••••..•.•... •.••••••.••.. 


76.8 


Minor offenders 


2S.7 







This (the South Central) was the only group of States in which the 
percentage of major offenders among white immigrant prisoners 
exceeded the percentage of such offenders among the white nonim- 
mi^ant prisoners. In each of the other geographical divisions the 
major and minor offenders were more evenly distributed among the 
immigrant prisoners than among the nonimmigrant. The conclusion 
to be drawn from such figures is that of the two bodies of criminals— 
the immi^ant and the native — the native (or American bom) 
exhibited m general a tendency to commit more serious crimes than 
the immi^ant. The criminalitj^ of the latter consisted more largely 
of the minor offenses that are in considerable measure a result of 
congested city life. This is clearly indicated in the detailed figures 
showing the offenses of prisoners in the several gjeographical divisions. 

One-ninth of the total number of prisoners enumerated in the 
United States were prisoners confined in North Atlantic penal insti- 
tutions for "offenses against public policy.'* Comjv.rea with the 
rest of the country the number of such prisoners is striking. In the 
whole United States 15,308 prisoners were in penal institutions for 
offenses against pubUc policy; 9,178, or approximately three-fifths 
of this number, were in tne North Atlantic States alone. And in this 
group of Stat^ the population is moie largely gathered into urban 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 217 

communities (chiefly cities of manufacture) than in any other section 
of the country. 

Another comparison that is of interest is that of white prisoners 
of foreign birth with negro prisoners (practically all of whom were 
probably native bom) — a comparison — that is, of the immigrant and 
the negro. In the North Atlantic, South Atlantic, and North Central 
divisions major offenders formed a smaller part of the body of white 
immigrant prisoners than of that of negro prisoners. In the South 
Central and Western States, however, conditions were reversed. In 
the first three geographical divisions named the major offenders were 
less common among the white immigrant prisoners than among the 
nonimmigrant, both white and negro, and in the Western States^ as 
well, the immigrant percentage was less than that of the native white, 
although greater in that division and in the South Central than the 
negro percentage. 

This separation of major and minor offenders adds evidence favor- 
able to the immigrant prisoner. It shows that the offenses of immi- 
grant prisoners were less frequently of a serious nature (major 
offenses) than were the offenses of native prisoners. Thus, the data 
gathered in the 1904 enumeration of prisoners showed that the immi- 
grant prisoners were relatively fewer in number and had been incar- 
cerated for less serious offenses than the native prisoners. 

2. Pbisonebs Committed Dubino 1904. 

Of the 149,691 prisoners committed to penal institutions through- 
out the United States during the year 1904, 86,833 were white persons 
bom in this country, 35,093 were white persons bom abroad, and 
23,698 were negroes. These three classes of persons thus composed 
the following proportions of the total body of prisoners committed 
during the year: Native white, 58 per cent; foreign white, 23.4 

BT cent; negro, 15.8 per cent; leaving 2.7 per cent made up of 
ongolians, Indians, and white persons of unknown nativity. The 
representation of the native whites was larger among the male prison- 
ers than among the female, while the opposite was true of the loreign 
whites and the negroes. The native whites furnished 59.4 per cent 
of the male prisoners and 44 per cent of the female prisoners; the 
foreign whites 22.4 per cent of the male and 33.6 per cent of the 
femsde; and the negroes 15.3 per cent of the male and 21.3 per cent 
of the female. 

70340'— VOL 36—11 15 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



218 



The Immigration Commission. 









I 

1 

I 
g 

i 



8 



P5 



I 









C 

I 



I 



I 



if 



-:3 



3 

ll 
I' 



1 



t 



I 



4| 



I 



i 

o 






^ 

:< 



,*l 



I 



^ 
& 






I 



3 

O 



^a 



'3 



il 



a 



a 



sf 



|gSS-§3 B 






siSi§g§ S 



3p^cia»t^M 



Sis^iSS 



§§l«§gS 5 



gggSg§5J I 






r« in A IQ r- 30 t^ 

F- e* » e6 «2 rt 00 



H uS^ 



gs*— :2* g 






§i2*S|8 § 



iiiiSis i 



CO 0> ^ >C OO !>• <0 















8*3 



Ssg 



g"i 



rg 












5? 
O 

e 

00 



H 



^c}dc<^cJ-4 



CO ix (D 00 •>! lO 00 



coc«udtwO»aor^ 



^o»r^ec«oc«to 



OO M t«» 0> t-^ 00 «0 



•oo«ooor^io 



O « •>! CO O •<«< Ok 

m «d od e4 ix^ «D ^ 



0»kOC4(0«0 

«^ e4 CO ed d CO t^ 



e« *4 a» to r« »o a 



eo «o "^ f-^ f^ r* O 



t^ eo ^ lO CO «o 00 



»oeow^»o^t» 



(O CO ^ CO «o eo v^ 






c«^aocoeo^^ 



oco«o^t»«o« 



^(ooooeo^eo 
3jg^e6«g^c< 



O^«eoooe4^^ 
C83|2««0|jc4 



III 
IP 



« S 



iiiliU 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



219 



= -^£- I 



o 


oS 'ci 




s 


oocto 


q6 




Ok 




Si 










S5 * * 


e4 




CO 




i 


3 ■■ 




^iA 






o 






CO 1-1 

«5£ • 


Ob 


00 i-l 


00 


CO »o 


0» 




« 






i 


c 

g 


■I 





o 

a 
s 



Digitized by 



Google 



220 The Immigration Commission. 

The latest percentage of native white prisoners was in the North 
Atlantic States, where they composed 60.2 per cent of all prisoners. 
The smallest percentage was in the South Atlantic States, wnere they 
formed only "0.5 per cent of the total .number of prisoners. The 
largest percentc^e of white immigrant prisoners was also in the 
North Atlantic States, being 32.4 per cent, but the smallest was in 
the South Central division, in wnich group of States the foreign 
whites composed only 2.7 pe^ cent of all prisoners. The negroes 
were most prominent in the South Atlantic States, forming 64.3 per 
cent of the prisoners, and least in evidence in the Western States, 
where only 5.1 per cent of the prisoners were negroes. In all sections 
of the country the native whites formed a larger j>ercentage of the 
male than of the female prisoners. In two groups of States — the 
North Atlantic and the Western — the foreign-born were more largely 
represented among the female prisoners than among the male, while 
in the South Atlantic, North Central, and South Central the foreign- 
bom were relatively more numerous among the male than among 
the female prisoners. 

Classifying the native white prisoners by parentage, it is found that 
34.7 per cent of them were of native parentage while 16.3 per cent 
were the children of immigrants. The children of natives occurred 
in largest proportion among the prisoners committed in the North Cen- 
tral States, where they composed 42.1 per cent of all prisoners, and 
in least proportion among those committed in the South Atlantic 
States, where only 27.3 per cent of the prisoners were native whites 
of native parentage. The children of immi^ants were found in 
largest proportion among the prisoners of the North Atlantic States 
and in smallest proportion among those of the South Atlantic division. 
In the former group of States 22.8 per cent of all prisoners conmiitted 
during the year were American-bom children of immigrants, and in 
the latter group only 1 .3 per cent. With regard to distribution of the 
sexes, the table shows a larger percentage of the male prisoners than 
of the female to have been native-bom persons of native parentage in 
every group of States except the Western, while in all sections of the 
country a larger percentage of the male than of the female prisoners 
was formed by American-bom persons of immigrant parentage. 

MAJOR AND MINOR OFFENDERS. 

Inasmuch as almost all of the inmiigrant prisoners were probably 
white, it is more fitting that in comparing immigrant and native crina- 
inality only white prisoners be considered. In Table 124 the white 
prisoners of known nativity have been segregated and their per cent 
distribution shown by nativity, classified as major and minor offend- 
ers, for the several States and Territories. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



221 



Table 124. — Per cent distribution of white prisoners of known nativity committed during 
1904, classified as major and minor offenders and by States and Territories. 





White prisoners of known nativity committed during 1904. 


State or Territory. 


Total. 


M^or offenders. 


Minor offenders. 




Percent 
native. 


Percent 
foreign- 
born. 


Percent 
native. 


Percent 
foreign- 
bom. 


Percent 
native. 


Per cpnt 
foreign- 
bom. 


Gimtinental United States 


71.2 


28.8 


78.3 


21.7 


69.9 


30il 






N«rth Atlantic division 


65.0 


35.0 


09.3 


30.7 


64.6 


35.5 






ifftfnA 


74.3 
66.7 
73.0 
55.2 
62.7 
62.7 
67.3 
61.6 
72.6 

90.0 


25.7 
34.3 
27.0 
44.8 
37.3 
37.3 
32.7 
38.6 
27.4 

10.0 


86.6 
78.6 

%.. 
67.8 
62.6 
73.6 

93.4 


14.4 
21.4 

(«) 
32.8 

32.2 
37.5 
26.4 

6.6 


73.4 
64.1 
69.8 
64.1 
62.1 
62.5 
67.3 
61.4 
72.4 

88.6 


26.4 


New Hainpffbire ............... r ... r - 


35.'9 


Vennont 


30.2 


Massachusetts 


45.9 


Rhode Island 


37.9 


Connecticut 


37.6 


New York 


32.7 


New Jersey 


38. • 


p^if^iiJiyivani^ 


27.6 


South Atlantic division 


11.6 






Delaware 


92.9 
99.3 
96.1 
95.1 
83.9 

79.8 


^^7 

7.1 
.7 
4.9 
4.9 
l&l 

20.2 


"ki 


nv» 


93.0 
99.4 

(«) 

88.6 
(°) 

78.7 


(») 


Maryland 


23. J 


Pifltrlct of ^oiHTnMa 


(«) 


Virginia 


96.6 
92.5 
99.2 

^^2 
(«) 

84.3 


4.4 

7.5 

.8 

(•) 

16.7 


^ zn 


West Virginia 


7.^ 


North Carolina 


.6 


South Carolina 


(«) 


Georgia 


^ 11.4 


Florida 


(«) 


North Central division 


21. S 






Ohio 


77.4 
91.5 
80.2 
75.8 
69.0 
64.5 
86.6 
92.9 
68.6 
82.5 
86.3 
92.6 

92.9 


22.6 
8.6 
19.8 
24.2 
31.0 
36.5 
13.4 
7.1 
31.4 
17.6 
14.7 
7.6 

7.1 


86.9 
91.9 
79.7 
75.9 
74.0 
66.8 
87.0 
92.3 

94.5 
90.3 


13,1 
8.1 
20.3 
24.1 
26.0 
33.2 
13.0 
7.7 

14.3 
5.5 

9.7 


75.7 
91.4 
80.4 
76.8 
68.2 
63.9 
86.6 
93.3 
71.1 
81.3 
85.2 
9a6 

96.0 


24.3 


Indiana 


8.C 


Illinois 


19.6 


Michigan 


24.2 


Wisconsin 


31. S 


Minnesota 


36.1 


Iowa 


13.4 


Missouri 


6.7 


North Dakota 


28.9 


South Dakota 


18. S 


Nebraska 


14.8 


Kansas 


9.5 


fionth Central dirision 


5.« 






Kentucky... 


99.2 
98.7 
96.6 
96.9 
87.9 
82.6 


.8 
1.3 
3.4 
3.1 
12.1 
17.4 


98.2 
97.3 

90.9 
78.1 


1.8 
2.7 


99.7 
100.0 

95.7 
86.7 
88.3 


.3 


Tennessee 




Alabama. 


"\z 


Mississippi 


Louisiana 


^ 9:i* 

21.9 


13. S 


Texas 


ll.J 


Indian Territory 




Oklahoma 


95.7 
72.7 


27.3 


%2 
75.2 




72.1 


27.9 


ArknnsaSr- , . . . 


6.8 
24.8 


Western division 






Montana 


72.1 
77.4 
71.8 
84.2 
72.7 
72.6 
76.7 
83.3 
73.7 
82.0 
71.5 


27.9 
22.6 
28.2 
15.8 
27.3 
27.4 
23.3 
16.7 
26.3 
18.0 
28.5 


74 7 
83.1 

%.* 

82.7 

71.6 
82.2 
72.9 


26.3 

17.3 

17.8 
27.1 


71.4 

70.4 
76.9 
82.3 
74.8 
81.8 
71.3 


28.6 


Wyoming 


(«) 


Colorado 


38.5 


New Mexico 


'\z 


Arizona 


Utah .- 


29.4 


Nevada 


23.1 


Idaho , , ... 


17.7 




25. t 


Oiecon 


18.3 


California 


28.7 







• Per cent not shown where base b less than 100. 



Digitized by 



Google 



222 



The Immigration Commission. 



The largest percentage of immigrant prisoners was in the North 
Atlantic States, where over one- third (35 per cent) of all white pris- 
oners were foreign-bom. The smallest was in the South Central 
States, where they composed only 7.1 per cent. In each of the North 
Atlantic States more than one-fourth of the prisoners committed dur- 
ing the year were of foreign birth, the smallest proportion being in 
Maine, where it was 25.7 per cent, and the largest in Massachusetts, 
where it was 44.8 per cent. In five of the nine North Atlantic States 
more than one- third of all white prisoners committed in 1904 were 
immigrants. These States were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, 
Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey. In oniv one other 
State in the country — Minnesota — was the proportion of the foreign- 
bom so large as one in every three. 

The native-bom foraoied a larger part of the major offenders than 
of the minor offenders in each geographical division except the South 
CentriJ, while with the same exception the foreign-bom fomied a 
smaller part. In every State of the North Atlantic group for which 
figures are shown immigrants composed a smaller percentage of the 
major than of the minor offenders, while the native-bom composed 
a larger percentage. 

In the South Atlantic division. West Virginia, North Carolina, 
and South Carolina were States in which the opposite was true. In 
the North Central division Illinois and Missouri were the only excep- 
tions, and in the South Central, Louisiana, and in the Western, 
Arizona and Washington did not conform to this rule. Thus out 
of the 33 States and Territories for which figures are shown, there 
were only 10 in which the foreign-bom furnished a larger proi>ortion 
of the major offenders than of the minor offenders, while in 23 States 
and Territories the native-bom were more conspicuous among the 
major than among the minor offenders. 

The mgnificance of the percentages of foreign-born among the white major and 
minor onenders committed during 1904 can best be brought out b}r comparing them 
with corresponding percentages of forei^-bom in the general white [wpulation 15 
years of age and over, classified by sex, as is done for geographic divisions in the follow- 
ing tabular statement. As the comparison makes no allowance for the large additions 
to the foreign-bom between 1900 and 1904, the percentages are less favorable to the 
foreign-bom than would otherwise have been the case. 



a 


Per cent foreign-bom. 


Diytoton. 


Among white prisoners of 
known nativity committed 
during 1904. 


In general white population 
15 years of age and over. 




Total 


Major 
offend- 
ers. 


Minor 
offend- 
ers. 


Total. 


Male. 


Female. 


Continental United States 


28.8 


21.7 


30.1 


21.9 


23.0 


20.7 






North Atlantic 


36.0 
10.0 
20.2 
7.1 
27.3 


30.7 
6.6 

16.7 
9.7 

24.8 


35.5 
11.5 
21.3 
5.0 
27.9 


30.8 
4.8 

23.3 
6.6 

27.4 


31.8 
5.3 

24.8 
6.2 

29.8 


29.8 


South Atlantic 


4.S 


North Central 


21.8 


South Central 


&0 


Western 


24.1 







Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



223 



Unlike the fi^iures for the prisoners enumerated on June 30^ 1904, those for the 
prisoners committed during 1904 show that the foreign-bom whites contribute to the 
prison class materially in excess of their representation in the general population. 
This condition, however^ is practically confined to the North Atmntic States, for in 
both the other two divisions in which the foreign-bom are of great numerical impor- 
tance tiiey form a smaller proportion of the prisoners than of the general white popula- 
tion 15 years of age and over. In the Western division the difference is very sfight, 
but in the North Central States the foreign-bom constitute 23.3 per cent of the general 
white population and only 20.2 per cent of the white prisoners, in the North Atlantic 
division the percentages of foreign-bom are 30.8 in the general population and 35 
among the prisoners. 

That the figures for the prisoners committed during the year are more unfavorable 
to the foreign-bom than the figures for the prisoners enumerated on the given date, 
is due to the fact that the prisoners committed during the year contain a larger pro- 
portion of minor offenders and the foreign-bom are relatively of more importance among 
minor offenders than among major. 

The foreign-bom do not contribute to the white major offenders above their repre- 
sentation in the general population at least 15 years of age except in the two Southem 
divisions, where they are comparatively unimportant. In the Western division, and 
more especially in the North Central, the proportion o! foreign-born is considerably 
lower among the white major offenders than in the white general population. 

Among the white minor offenders the proportion of foreign-bom is generally higher 
than among the white major offenders, and in the North Atumtic, South Atlantic, and 
Western divisions exceeds the proportion of foreign-bom in the general white popula- 
tion. In the North Central division the foreign-bom contribute 23.3 per cent of the 
general white population at least 15 years of age, and only 21.3 per cent of the white 
minor offenders. 

From these figures, as well as from those for the prisoners enumerated on June 30, 
1904, it is evident that the popular belief that the loreign-bom are filling ^e prisons 
has little foundation in fact. It would seem, however, that they are slightly more 
prone than the native whites to commit minor offenses. Possibly to some degree 
this is attributable to the fact that the foreign-bom white are more highly concentrated 
in urban communities.^* 

PARENTAGE. 

In three States more than one-half of all native white prisoners 
committed during 1904 were the children of immigrants, both parents 
being foreign-born. In six other States the children of immigrants 
composed over one-third of all native white prisoners of known 
parentage. These 9 States were as follows: 

Percent 

Ifassachusetts 62.9 

Connecticut 55. 8 

Rhode Island 53. 9 

Minnesota 40. 4 

Wisconsin 39. 6 



Per cent. 

New Jersey 39. 5 

New Hampshire 36.6 

Pennsylvania 34. 1 

Maine 33. 6 



Seven of these States are in the North Atlantic division and of these 
are the three in which half the native white prisoners of known parent- 
age were the children of immigrants. 

« PrisoneiB and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904| pp. 4(ML 



Digitized by 



Google 



224 



The Immigration Commissicm. 



1 



i 

1 
•I 

s 






1^ 

r 



if 



t 



^ 



<? 



A 

e3 






8 
I 

i" 
I 

1 

i, 
s 

i 






m 



fc|f 
5? I 



ill 



Hi 



Iff 

tag 



III 

^ OS 






III 






I 



SO 



00 t^tooor«to^i0*40 <0 •o»'H»oocQ*40^ 



9 '<«• i-^ t-4 «0 O CI O f-t ^ 

r^ ^ 00 00 00 14 oi e4 <d ^4 






r^ ^ a» r^ •>! 00 !-• o » oo 



00 rMACOCO 

*6 co^«So» 



« « « <o 






^^S^stSSs t 



•o o « « 



-^co«0o»o>ocoa»<0 



«c <o « a» a» 00 CO to ..H lo 



o^ooe^rMtOf^oco o 



00 ^O 



c4 <5t>:<5 



55^ 



y-\9 ^->o> oi Oft ,.»«q6 ^b,^ 



^8 



d"* 



e4 <» 



^-"^ 55 






.<5oi.<S»(5«>^«4 



oe«o»aoo^« 



•oco«iH^ee*oo 



a»ao<0M^f-t« 






C0C4O o> 









CO h«eoc«a»a» 
^ ddde>c< 



jS^ si 



<0 C«l^00i-i«D Oi 









idsi^^si^i^ 



i 



III 



ii. 



I 



f I 









III! I sistlllll f iilllli 



H 



III 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



225 















00 CO 
9Ci 



9 0> (O 0> 00 CO 

>4 t<^ q6 eii*4 r^ 



oo^weoo O 






•O t^ fxC 



o6 *4 g^ »^^ il 



•00000M3t^ O 



c«(D o<oeo 
9 9 ^^^Cb t^ ot 



O « r* Or« Ok 



i« eoo e« 

^ ^9 t6 






<: o6 



o6o^ 









'^ g 



CO «D 






o <oe» o 



coco a» 



<o o 



^^^^.-..-.....-^Ss^s 









*4 o6 



dcocieooao a»t^w9<o 
(^*4o6<do»«d -^ipfociao 



e«e«e«r*o» oo 



•oo»oo-<«<i^o 
^^c4e6ior^ 



^ 00 



^ o -<«< «o f-4 lO eo^ooM 









.sJ S 



tor^^rMoot^ ooc4t«e« 






ill 






•9 • M 

1 S£ 



111*! 



Hill i lllllllil I lUllllllll 



I S^5z<S^S>53 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



226 The Immigration Commissicxi. 

In the North and South Atlantic States persons of native parentage 
were found in larger proportion among the major offenders than among 
the minor offenders. In the North Central, &)uth Central, and West- 
ern States they contributed more largely to the ranks of the minor 
offenders. The American-bom children of immigrants were more 
conspicuous among the major than among the minor offenders in the 
Soutn Central States only. In the North Atlantic division, the 
South Atlantic, the North Central, and the Western the children of 
inmiigrants were less prominent among the major than among the 
minor offenders. In the North Atlantic States they formed 31.7 per 
cent of the major offenders and 39.7 per cent of the minor offenders. 
These figures are of importance because of the large number of 
prisoners committed in this group of States (44,895, or 54.7 per cent 
of the 82,045 white prisoners of known parentage committed through- 
out the United States). In two of the North Atlantic States, New 
York and New Jersey, the relation of the American-bom children of 
immigrants to major and minor offenders was reversed, but for the 
group of States as a whole minor offenses were relatively more com- 
mon than major offenses among the native-bom of foreign parentage. 

Of the native white prisoners, 29.8 per cent were of foreign parentage, while of the 
entire native white population only 18.8 per cent were of forei^ parentage. That 
this contrast is mainly the result of conditions in the North Atlantic States is indi- 
cated by the following tabular statement: 





Per cent of foreign 
parentage.a 


Dlvidoii. 


Among na- 
tive white 
prlsonei? of 
known pai^ 
entage com- 
mitted dur- 
ing 1904. 


In native 
white gen- 
eral popu- 
laUon,I900. 


Continental United States 


29.8 


18.8 






North Atlantic 


38.8 
4.5 

22.1 
4.8 

21.8 


26.8 


South Atlantic 


3.6 


North Central 


23.3 


South Central 


4.4 


Western a 


21.8 



• Includes only those with both parents forelgn-bom. 

In all the States of the North Atlantic division except New York the percentage of 
native white of foreign i)arenta^e among native white prisoners was greatly in excess 
of the percentages of native white of foreign parentage in the total native white popu- 
lation. In Massachusetts, for instance, 62.9 per cent of the native white prisonezB 
were of foreign parenta^, as compared with only 33.7 per cent of the native white 
population in 1900. InNew York, on the other hand, only 28.3 per cent of the native 
white prisoners were of foreign parentage, as compared with 33.5 per cent of the total 
native white population. 

In all the States of the Western division, in all but Ohio and Indiana of the North 
Central, and in all but West Virginia and Georgia of the South Atlantic, the native 
whites of foreign parentage formed a smaller percentage of the native white prisonera 
than of the general native white population. In most of the States of the South Cen- 
tral division, on the other hand, the native whites of foreign parentage contribute to 
the prison class in excess of their representation in the general population, but in 
both the southern divisions the native white of foreign parentage are a comparatively 
imimportant class.* 

o Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 42. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 227 

With regard to major offenders, 22 per cent were of foreign parent- 
age, while only 18.8 per cent of the native white population was of 
foreign parentage in 1900. In the North Atlantic and South Central 
States the representation of the American-bom children of immi- 
grants among major offenders was greater than in the native white 
population. In the South Atlantic, North Central, and Western 
States, however, the reverse was true. The percentage of persons 
of foreign parentage among the minor offenders was in excess of their 
representation in the general native white population in the North 
Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Western divisions, but less than their 
representation in the population in the North Central and South 
Central divisions. 

OFFENSE AND COUNTBY OF BIBTH. 

The two facts most important in a study of immigrant criminality 
are the race of the offender and the nature of his offense. Census 
statistics do not reveal race, but they show what may serve as a sub- 
stitute in grouping immigrants— country of birth. In the table 
below prisoners have been classified by color, nativity, and country 
of birth, and the per cent distribution of major and minor offenders 
shown by offense. Such a tabulation makes possible the comparison 
of the relative frequency of various offenses among offenders from 
various countries, grouped as major and minor offenders. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



228 



The Immigration Commi8si<m. 



I 



I 

•5 



I 






V 


00 


1 




(Xi 


^ 




M 




.§> 


52; 


^ 


U 




J3 


fti 


S! 


"tJ 


En 


« 


1 





1 


1 







ee 






,fe 






1 






•§> 










i 
£ 

^ 



^ 
s 



n 

< 



^1 






DOTS 



*1 



3 



II 









5 
-a 



2 

o 



O 









000 









O 00 'OO o 



00000 









to 'to 



2-^ 5; 



^ t« M) eC n CQ CO CSMOftOftCO 

p5^ oJ^e^'rf • 



WW 



c4«o to>oakO»eo 



a ^^ a 



^«oe<«co<De««« ^•ot<»o»'* "O 



O >H>OC4 









•oe4 'p^ 






>oe<4f-4 • • • • ^ '^^^ 



^c4^ .... ^ . .^^ 



O) M r-4 CO MS CO O O»t«0t«i0 



^^ t<i * 'id.-; 



cood^^ ' eg 






0000 ; o 



00000 o 



coodcoco * ^ 



OC40CIIO 01 



QOt»<0|o • CO 



^^id<rf-4 o 



28- 






oa»coao*o lo 



•0OCO..4 



oooo<o*eto i» 



^eo^HOto ♦ 



eocicoeo 
w'oicd^ 



lOOt^lo CO 

rcdcJ ' -r 









oo-.4oe<eo oi 
adc«-^o« ' cd 



OQ 



1^ ^t |!ji Iblii 



5-«jmc20,S^ |«^S>^ 5 111 8.0 









Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



229 





M 


00 




16.3 

27.2 

6.1 

1.3 






r* 




oooo 










cooo 






o 






-♦"♦h. 










•fl 














COOON 
00 oo^^ 






C4 








<0 










te 










«c 


03 

PC 


oo«ot*c»e<i 


to 


(C 










O! 


O 

o 


00 00 Otto.- 




3 


22.0 

31.8 

6.5 

2.0 

1 


i-« oe 




21.2 

31.1 

6.2 

1.9 

.1 


^ oc 




C4 CI O CS r- 


• .-1 oc 








III 



t».-<eoooo^ 

0> 00 00 CO CO 



o 00 00 V eo 1-4 



«0 lO to CO (>« r-4 

oo^gj^D ' CO 



•OOOM-^O^ 



—t QC t^ fD -^ -^ 



o»coioc< 
c4^ 'i-I 



jgodcJt-Joi 






CO »o 
«5 CO 



o o 

lO o 



© M 



CO O 

o6 CO 



00 CO 



o to 

^ 00 



C»COt^'*«-<f-<CO o 



^ ^ S'-gw^ 



ioao>-«coco t« 00 
« 2 ^ ' S3 ww*^ ^ 



lOO^COf-i 



oeot»o 



(Oi00t>«0 



cowt-coooc* 



V c-i CO 'S" •© 



00 I'. 



CO o 

CO CO 



eo "^ 



r>.^«oa» •* c>i r- o J35 -^ 'T c< 



CO 10(0 04 






^-^lO*-* .-•oio'rr-^ 00 eo 






t«e>)^ CO 



o»c«o» 

si ■■ 



C« O O «D 



•0<-t04 



•<*• ^ CO 



oooa^ e>* 



*-i>-t^ 04 



C«0«i-i o 






t«C0<AC0lO • co^ 



oooa»>Hco 



•O to coo* 00 



CQOtOOttO 

i-4t^r4 *ol 



C0O0104 04 

.-i cj -i ' oi 



»^o»ot>-t* 



^«OOCO»H , 

•-4o4r>I 'wi' 



04 00O».-<5O 



oo»ot«eo ^co«o 



•or^o»^a» 



r«coo»cQt>- 



DCDO00<-* 

*o«o* "^ 



a 
$ 

3 



<OOi-4COO o»«o 



«-4tOOiOO» *oo 



0^<-*i0t« 






111 



nil 



^ 1 1 



Hi I i 



ii 

♦»'•* 



11. 



0i 



oaia 



Digitized by 



Google 



230 



The Immigration Commission. 



Major offenders, — First considering the major offenders, it appears 
that offenses against chastity, against pubhc policy, and against the 
person were rdatively more frequent among the foreign-bom as a 
whole than among the native-born. Classifying the foreign-bom 
by country of birfli, it is found that of the 11 immigrant groups 
thus formed, 5 exceeded the native-bom in percentage of offenses 
against chastity. These were the Austrian, Canaaian, English 
and Welsh, Polish, and Swedish, of which the Canadian had the 
largest percentage, 9.3. In relative frequency of offenses against 
public policy the German, Irish, and Mexican immigrants exceeded 
the American-bom, the largest percentage being that of the Irish, 
or 23.5 per cent. Offenses against the person occurred with greater 
relative frequency among the major crmaes of the Austrians, Irish, 
Italians, Mexicans, Poles, Scotch, and Swedes than among those of 
the native-bom. The Italians were notable in that over half tlieir 
major crimes (57.1 per cent) consisted of offenses against the person. 
Offenses against property were relatively more frequent among the 
Canadians, English and Welsh, Germans, Russians, and Scotch than 
among the American born, the largest percentage of such offenses 
being that of the English and Welsh, 69.7 per cent. 

OTspecific offenses, those grouped under offenses against the person 
and against property were committed by a sufficiently large number 
of persons, and are in general clearly enough defined to make com- 
parisons of the nativity groups valuable wnth regard to them. A 
striking condition is revealed d}^ the figures for the various offenses 
against the person. Homicide, assault, robbery, and rape all occurred 
J in larger proportion among tne crimes of the Italians than among 
those of any other group of prisoners, native or foreign, white or 
colored. Furthermore, 5 immigrant groups had larger percentages 
of prisoners conmiitted for homicide than the native-bom, 8 had 
larger percentages committed for assault, 3 had larger percentages 
committed for robbery, and 6 had larger percentages committed lor 
rape. Summarized in tabular form these results are as follows: 

Table 127. — Relative frequency of offenses against the person among major offenden 
committed during 1904y by country of birth of offender. 



Homicide. 


Assault. 


Robbery. 


Rape. 


Country of birth 
of offender. 


Per 
cent. 


Countrv of birth 
of offender. 


Per 

cent. 


Country of birth 
of offender. 


Per 
cent. 


Country of birth 
of offender. 


Per 
cent. 


Italy 


16.2 
13.0 
12.3 
9.8 
7.0 
6.4 
6.0 
4.4 
8.7 
3.6 
3.0 

Z8 


Italy 


29.5 
24.2 
19.9 
13.7 
12.0 
11.8 
9.9 
8.6 
7.9 
7.3 

5.8 
4.0 


Italy 


6.2 
6.1 
5.0 
4.7 

4.6 
4.5 
4.0 
3.7 
8.3 
3.3 
1.6 
L6 


Italy 


4.4 


Sweden 


Poland 


Canada 


Austria 


4.3 


Austria 


Austria. 


Scotland 

United States 

England and 
Wales 


Canada. 


3.0 


Mexico 


Mexico 


Russia .... 


3 


Poland 


Scotland 


Sweden 


3.0 


United States 


Ireland 


Mexico 

United Stetea.... 
Poland 


2.7 


Oermahy 


Germany 

Russia 

United Stetes 

Canada 


Ireland 


2.3 


Canada 


Sweden 


2.2 


Russia 


Russia 


' Scotland 


2.0 


Ire^and 


Austria 


' England and 
j Wales 


1.8 


Scotland 


England and 
Wales 


Germany 

Mexico 




England and 
Wales 


1.5 


Sweden 


Poland 


! Ireland 


1.4 








1 ^^ 





Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



231 



Of the offenses against property which are found among all the 
nationalities, burglary occurred with greatest relative frequency 
among the Mexicans, larceny among the Kussians, forgery andf fraud 
among the Scotch. Arranged like the offenses against the person, 
those against property show the several nationalities in the following 
relations: 

Table 128. — Relative Jreauenct/ of offenses against vrojoertv among major offeviders 
eommxtUa dunng 1904, by country of Urtn o/offervier. 



Burglary. 


Larceny. 


Forgery. 


Fraud. 


Coantry of birth 
of offender. 


Per 
cent. 


Coantry of birth 
of onender. 


Per 
cent. 


Country of birth 
of offender. 


Per 
cent. 


Country of birth 
of offender. 


Per 

cent 


Mexico 


20.8 

26.0 
23.8 
23.0 
22.3 
22.0 
21.0 
20.1 
19.3 
13.3 
10.2 i 
«.8| 


Russia 


39.8 

35.5 
32.5 
32.0 
31.9 
31.8 
31.2 
2S.0 
27.0 
25.7 
25.3 
18.0 


Scotland. ••••.... 


9.0 
7.0 
6.9 
6.5 
6.2 
5.7 

5.5 
5.4 
4.5 
2.3 
2.2 
1.9 


Scotland 


6.0 


England and 
Wales 


Eneland'and 
Wales 


Sweden 


Germany 


2.9 


Germany 

United States.... 
Austria 


England and 

Wales 

United States.... 
Sweden.... 




Canada 


Canada 


2.8 


Scotland 


Sweden 


2.0 


OftrmftTiv 


Germany 

United States.... 
Poland 


Canada 


2.0 


United States 


England and 
Wales 


Mexico 


1.6 


Sweden 


Canada 


1.2 


Ireland 


Au.«?trla 


Poland 


Italy 


1.2 


Russia 


Scotland 


Russia 


Poland 


1.1 


Austria 


Mexico 


Ireland 


Russia 


1.1 


Poland 


Ireland 


Mexico 


Austria.... 


.5 


Italy 


Italy 


Italy 


Ireland 


.6 













Minor offenders. — Among the minor offenders, as among the 
major offenders, offenses against chastity, against public policy, and 
against the person were more common in the immigrant group than 
in the native. Offenses against property, on the other hand, occu- 
pied a larger place in the minor crmies of the native than of the 
foreign-bom. 

While the most important group of major offenses is probably that 
against the person, the most important class of minor offenses appears 
to be thkt against public policy. Of all American-born minor 
offenders 73 per cent were committed for offenses against public 
policy and of all foreign-bom minor offenders 79.4 per cent. Drunken- 
ness and disorderly conduct occurred in larger proportion among the 
offenses of immigrants than of natives, while the reverse was true of 
the violation of hquor laws and vagrancy. Three of these offenses — 
drunkenness, disorderly conduct, and vagrancy — are of sufficient 
importance to warrant further notice. 

i)runkenness occurred in widely varying proportions among the 
immigrant groups, the largest bemg that of the Irish, or 49.8 per 
cent, and the smallest that of the Mexicans, or 2.7 per cent. Of 
native white prisoners 36.2 per cent were committed for this offense, 
or a smaller percentage than that of 5 of the nativity groups of the 
foreign-bom. 

Disorderly conduct formed the largest percentage of the offenses 
of the Mexicans, or 27.6 per cent, and the smallest of the Canadians, 
or 5.7 per cent. Of the immigrant groups, 7 exceeded the native in 
proportion of prisoners committed for this offense. 

Vagrancy caused the commitment of a larger percentage of prisoners 
bom m Germany than of those bom in any otner country, one-third 
(33.6 per cent) of all German minor offenders having been incarcer- 



Digitized by 



Google 



232 



The Immigration G>mmi8sion. 



ated for this offense. The smallest proportion, 14.3 per cent, was 
that of the Italians. The American bom ranked sixth in percentage 
of prisoners committed for vagrancy, being exceeded by immigrants 
from 5 different countries. 

Arranged in the order of their percentages of these three offenses, 
the nativity groups enumerated in Table 126 bear the following rela- 
tions to each other: 

Table 129.— Relative frequency of drunkenness, disorderly conduct, and vagrancy among 
minor offenders committed during 1904^ by country of birth of offender. 



Drunkenness. 


Disorderly oonducL 


Vagrancy. 

1 


Country of birth of 
offender. 


Per 

cent. 


Country of birth of 
oftender. 


Per 
cent. 


Country of birth of 
offender. 


Per 
cent. 


Ireland 


40.8 
48.3 
42.8 
38.6 
34.5 
».7 
18.1 
17.9 
10.8 
10.2 
7.3 
2.7 


Mexico 


27.6 
25.3 
22.7 
20.7 
17.6 
1«.5 
14.1 
13.1 
11.6 
11.2 
10.9 
6.7 


Germany 


33.6 


Canada 


Austria 


England and Wales ....... 

Scotland 


29.5 


Scotland 


Russia 


29.0 


En^rland and Wales 


Italy 


Mexico 


28.9 


Sweden 


Germany 

Sweden 

Ireland 

United States 


United States 


24 5 


United States 


Sweden 


23.7 


Poland 


Ireland 


23.6 


Germany 


Austria 


20.5 


Russia 


England and Wales 

Scotland 

Poland 


Poland 


19. d 


A ustria 


Canada 


17.8 


Italy 


Russia 


16.4 


Mexico 


Canada 


Italy 


14.3 











In the census report a comparison is made between the representa- 
tion of immigrants bom in the various countries in the body of white 
immigrant prisoners and their representation in the general popula- 
tion of foreign birth. The population figures, however, are tnose of 
1900, while the figures of prisoners are those of 1904. As the immi- 
gration from the several countries was very unequal during the period 
between these dates, it is doubtful if the population figures shown 
approximate very nearly the actual conditions. Moreover, such a 
comparison as this, by failing to take into consideration such factors 
as age and sex, which may exert a marked influence on the propor- 
tion of the prison class of certain groups of immigrants, is too subject 
to error to te of great value. Indeed, it might be harmful, by giving 
testimony which is a perversion of the truth. Since little of value can 
come of such a comparison in a study of immigrant criminality, and 
much of error might result, the safer course is to make no use of the 
figures. Those snowing country of birth and offense in such a way 
that the relative frequency of the several forbidden acts is made 
evident are far more trustworthy and significant bases of compari- 
son and can best be employed unmodified and unconfused by incom- 
plete comparisons of prisoners with population. 

AGE. 

In the table next submitted the ages of prisoners, classified as major 
and minor offenders, are shown by color, race, nativity, and parentage: 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



238 



8 
I 



|g 



11 



I- 



ft. 



■4 



t 

s 

l-l 

S 

n 





O 

1 


s 


1 


O 


tI 


M 


♦» 


2 





I 



5o9 



II 



pi 



m 



%^ 



m 



5e 



I* 



I 












^RgS5 



t«O<D«-400C0'«OOa0C9 









e4*O(0f-i<DaCO00OQ0 



,^1^ MO 00 CO a «d ^ e<S 



■^^Ok^cooocoMoeoeo 
* -^ q6 Oi C4 00 >o ^ ^ ^ 



coioeOf-it<.oo^QOC4flO 



CI OOO O 0» O CO ^ CO CO M 

' ^ ^^ Ok e4 ai CD ^ ^ r4 



t>-^r^<oa>(0^<oto^co 
' (^ jaS oi ^ 06 lo CO oS ^ * 



1 iiil 

aaaaaaasaat 



P 
II 

1^ 

ii 

II 

l|l 



79340*— VOL 36—11- 



-16 



Digitized by 



Google 



234 



The Immigratioii CommissicMi. 



8 



I 



"§• 



t 

9 



pi 

5 §» w 

11 § 



o. 
•3 



5' 






I 



id 






w 

m 



w fl ^ 

3ll 



1^ 



II* 



!2; 



1^ 






^ 



I 



f-l f-l f-l *H ^ ^ P? 



- ^ t- ,: r^ o I - 1^ I- * CO 



^285 



•« ft d w «J ^ to e4»J 



^sass 



* «$ uS a6 -^ m c> a6 06 CO 



i^<0(0M>-iO00<00»C9O 



* f-« ej 06 lo '^ ai (O lo ci 



coto<Deo^^ooaotoe«eo 
' c> t>^ «$ io CO o> <d t^ c« 



'tdcicoidtorcddci 



■•COeOiOOiOCtCO^^iO 

' Oft 06 (d '^ C4 e> t^ 06 e4 



CO^<OtoU3CQOOOOakiO 



eOO^^OO(00000<0*OOa 

' r>l •* ^ CO CO fi 06 c5 ^ 



^ococo(oafto»oto<-*a» 
* 06 <d to CO C4 d 06 9 ^ 



I iiiiiiiiiil 



«oo»>H«o«HM^i-iooeo 
*H*-«^^ioakciioe6e4 



t^Moo^^coct^^ooeo 



t«oaioco^Md«o<o<oakee 



COCOMO^OOAOOO^QO 

*<5 <da6 ^co Okodooco 



«-4(Oooocoai^o»iooo 
'■^G>c«c<coc6dcot>i^ 



10 Oa C4 O O M « CO t« CO ^ 

'•-4do6te^o6io*oc« 



M^-^OOOd^OktOOOM 

' c« o t^ ^ ci 06 *6 «$ f-4 



o e«iooe«e<ai<o«oeoio*oe( 



^o^r^«or*cor*fOt*«< 
* d d t<^ CO «^ Ok <d 1^ e4 



cotococoe^o^eookv^ 
*e»a6d^cidt<^t^c4 



*o6dMScoe6do6a»^ 



io<Dr^f-)cor-iaic«»o*ob 
'e»o6«Jcoe4a»t^o6co 



i 



assasaaaast 



Digitized by 



Google 



Inunigration and Crime. 235 

On the whole, the American-bom offenders were younger than the 
foreign-bom. The percentage of the former exceeded that of the 
latter at each age period below 35 years. From 35 onward the 
foreign-born had the larger percentages. Of the native prisoners 
69.1 per cent were under 35 years of age; of the foreign-bom only 

39.8 per cent. The wide difference in the ages of native and imnu- 
grant offenders might be laid to the fact that the inmiigrant popula- 
tion is chiefly made. up of adults, while in the native population is a 
lai^e number of children. The younger ages would thererore be likely 
to be more largely represented in the ranks of native criminality, and 
the middle period of life would be likely to be that of a larger part 
of the immigrant prisoners. Such is the case; but beginning with the 
the forty-first year (the age of 40) a peculiar situation appears — the 
immigrants contributing steadily to the ranks of criminality and the 
natives falling off. Prisoners between the ages of 50 and 59 composed 

13.9 per cent of the total number of imnugrant prisoners, or as large 
a percentage as that of any other age. Tlxe same age period, on the 
other hand, contributed but 7.9 per cent to the total of American- 
bom prisoners. Furthermore, 9.3 per cent of the foreign-bom pris- 
oners were persons 60 years of age or over, while only 3.2 per cent 
of the native-born were as old as this. 

The greater prominence of the nonimmigrant prisoners of the 
earlier ages is rendered yet more striking by the relations in the 
native group of prisoners of native and of foreign parentage. Those 
of native parentage exceeded in proportion those or foreign parentage 
below the age of 30, while the reverse was true (with slignt excep- 
tions at 60 and beyond) after that age. A tendency is noticeable 
toward the maturer ages in the foreign parentage group (just as in 
the foreign-born group) and toward uie more immature ages in the 
native parentage group (as in the aggregate native-bom group). 

The age of greatest frequency is also of interest. In the native- 
bom it was the period from 20 to 24 years. 18.6 per cent of all native 
prisoners being oetween those ages. In tne foreign-bom there were 
two periods, the one from 35 to 39 years and the one from 50 to 50 
years, 13.9 per cent of all immigrant prisoners belonging to each of 
these age groups. Among the native-bom the age of greatest fre- 
quency for prisoners of native parentage was from 20 to 24 years, 
and for prisoners of foreign parentage from 30 to 34 years, again 
showing a similarity between immigrants and the American-bom 
children of immigrants in that in each group the prisoners were older 
than were those in the native group as a whole or among the American- 
bom of native parentage. 

When major offenders alone are considered, a greater difference 
between natives and immigrants is found. Here the native-bom 
exceed the foreign-bom in proportion only up to the age of 29 instead 
of up to 34. Yet 63.2 per cent of all major white offenders of Ameri- 
can birth were under 30 years of age, while 52.8 per cent of the 
foreign-bom were below that age. In the native group, major offenders 
of native parentage were relatively more numerous than those of for- 
eign parentage at the age periods 10 to 14, 20 to 29, and 50 and over, 
but relatively fewer at all other ages. Of the native-bom of native 
parentage 63.1 per cent of the major offenders were under 30 years 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



236 



The Immigration G>Runission. 




i 


O 
B 

• 


^ 




*"• 


2 


a> 


K 


« 


i£ 


o 




yQ 




1 




^ 




I 


Id 


o 


^ 


lo 


< 


T* 


^ 


ov 


III 


't- 


« 


I 


< 


IQ 


ft* 


* 


S 


-* 


D 


^ 


W 


^ 


o 


o 


b. 


♦ 


2 




OC 


01 


s 


1^ 


it 


1 


> 


«0 


g 


■* 


2S 


;^ 


1 


s 


1 


1 


s 

^ 


cl 


a: 


■^ 


< 


* 


£ 


el 


Ul 


• 

o 


^ 


rt 


§ 




± 


d) 






o 


1 


^ 


in 


ill 




> 


+ 


ii 


1 
o 





Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 237 

of age, while of the native-bom of foreign parentage the proportion 
was 61.4 per cent. 

Of minor offenders 41 per cent of the native-bom were below 
30 years of age and 24.2 per cent of the foreign-bom. Indeed, the 
foreign-bom minor offenders were relatively fewer at each age period 
below 35 years than the native-bom and relatively more numerous 
at each age period from 35 years onward. Among the American- 
born minor offenders of native parentage, the ages 10 to 29 and 60 
and over were more common than they were among the American- 
bom of foreign parentage, while all other ages were less common. 
Prisoners under 30 years of age composed 44.2 per cent of all minor 
offenders of native parentage and 32.7 per cent of all minor offenders 
who were Asierican-bom children of immigrants. 

The age period between 20 and 24 years was the one at which the 
largest percentage of both native and foreign major offenders was 
committed. The same period was the one at which the lai^est per- 
centage of the native mmor offenders was committed, but that from 
35 to 39 years was the one at which more immigrant minor offenders 
were committed than at any other. The penods of greatest fre- 
quency among the native-bom of native and of foreign parentage 
were: Major offenders — native parentage, 20 to 24; foreign parent- 
age, 20 to 24; minor offenders — ^native parentage, 20 to 24; foreign 
{)arentage, 35 to 39. TTius 20 to 24 was the age of greatest frequency 
or the native and foreign bom and the native-bom of native and 
foreign parentage with r^ard to major offenders and for the native- 
bom as a whole and the native-bom of native parentage with regard 
to minor offenders. For the native-bom of foreign parentage and the 
foreign-bom the age of greatest frequency of minor offenders was 
from 35 to 39 years. 

AGE AND SEX. 

By separating the male and female prisoners additional data are 
obtained regardmg age distribution. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



238 



The Immigraticm G>inimssion. 



I 



"^ 



5* 
3 



If 



*i S 


s 


i| 




p 




?5^ 


O 


i*§ 


P4 


§^ 


O 


t^. 








1^ 




'^ 








^ 



H 

e2 



1 
5 



I 






r4e5gJ54ol«de4e»le4 









«««ao>or«eo»ooi 
_ r^ 1^ 015 e4 Ok <d ^ e4 



^5i^25d« 



CO r« C4 •<< o» e« ■« e« e« o CO 






^^OOcOOCO^QOiOOkM 



CO<D-<«*i-4t»OftaOOOOC«M 

*idQ6akc4adi<S^e4^ 









CkOOO<D^<0COOtCOO^ 

' <d o a6 clad 14 eici 



*<d9i$»^a6i4e4e4^ 



I 



333333S333& 



3 
O 

o 



e 11 no»e««oiO'«»4«o 



.Jiiii 

SS3S3333 
S:SSSS399 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



239 






•-4 04 CO 






CO coo 
^06 ^i 



COOM3 

«$e4 ' 



eSci ' 



i^oeo 



• «oco*o 
aSeo 



^^ ' 



eoM3 
e»«o 






0OMdO» 



r>^e<i>H 



O»>HQ0 



o eocoio^ioor«cooo«OflO 



< 

o 



^ t^ d d '^ *^ ^ «^ c«i J 



^^oao««oor«««o«o 
* c4 »«U "^ «J «5 c><«i r^ e4 

.■4 ^4 ,-1 ^4 t^ v4 



^O^r^OtOOOOBr-tlOOO 



e4r««o^coeoc>)»eo^ 
' -^ cj k5 <d 06 Mi o6 c^ t-« 



e<»^eowoo«o»H^t«-w«o 



eo^c««otoc«oe>oo<o 
* 06 o t>^ «d ei5 ^ «(5 «S ^ 



' e> C9 1<^ 00 ^ a» <d t^ oi 



eoe«e4«o*oakao»c«ooe> 



eooor«<o*^oeo^t«^ 



C«>-ieO«O<D«0<OieOk«OC9 



cow9t^^^t<.QOor«o«> 
' od <d M^ c^ cj o od oa -^ 



^W300C«t»«0000«^iOO 



' a» oi «$ ed 1-4 o> t<^ od e>i 



III 



g 



lllllll 



aaaaaaasaat 



If 



ft 

II 

r 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



240 



The Immigration Commission. 



In the main^ the figures show the same conditions as were revealed 
by those treatmg of ftie sexes combined. The native-bom, both male 
and female, were committed to penal institutions at earher ages than 
the foreign-bom. Of each age period shown below 35 years the native 
prisoners had a larger percentage than the foreign. Not only was 
this the case in regard to male offenders, but in regard to female 
offenders as well, the dividing line between inuniCTants and natives 
falling in each instance at the same point — after the age of 34 years. 
That curious tendency of the American-bom children of immiCTants 
(regardless of sex) to a Ukeness to immigrants themselves whicn was 
shown by Table 130 is evident in Table 131 with regard to both the 
males and females. Just as persons of the younger ages were less 
conspicuous amon^ immigrant than among native prisoners, so are 
they found in relatively smaller numbers amone the children of im- 
mi^ants than among the children of natives, rrisoners of each age 
period below 30 years formed a smaller part of the total number of 
male prisoners of native parentage than of male prisoners of foreign 
parentage, while among tne femSe prisoners the Iftrger percentages 
occurred among those of native parentage up to 35 jears. 

A combination of a number or age periods is of mterest. Thus, 
below is shown for both sexes the per cent distribution of prisoners 
of the several known nativities and parentages under 20 years of age, 
under 30, under 50, and under 60, forming a cumulative statement 
of the ages of the prisoners committed during 1904: 



Age. 



Males. 



Native-bora. 



Native! Foreign 
parent- parent- Total, 
age. I age. 



For- 



bora. 



Females. 



Native-bora. 



Native 
parent- 
age. 



Foreign 
parent- 
age. 



Total. 



Foi^ 

eign- 
born. 



Allaget. 

Under 20 years. 
Under 30 years 
Under 50 years, 
Under ao years 



100.0 100.0 



100.0 



100.0 



100.0 



100.0 



100.0 



loao 



10.6 
48.0 
89.1 
96.7 



8.3 



87.4 
97.1 



10.1 
45.1 
88.8 
96.9 



5.1 
28.6 
76.8 
90.9 



8.4 
46.4 
91.3 
97.8 



4.9 
32.6 
91.6 
97.6 



7.6 
42.6 
91.6 
97.8 



2.2 
21.0 
77.7 
9ai 



A comparison of male wdth female prisoners is likewise of interest. 
In the aggregate native white group the males exceeded the females 
in percentage of prisoners up to the age of 24. From 25 to 44 the 
females exceeded, when the greater percentage again shifted to the 
males. Of the foreign-bom, the males predominated up to the a^e 
of 29. From 30 to 49 tlie females were in excess; from 60 to 59 the 
males; and from 60 onward, the females. Among the native-bom 
of native parentage the males were in latter proportion up to the age 
of 24; from 25 to 39 the females; and from 40 onward, the males. 
Among the native-bom of foreign parentage the males had the larger 
percentage up to 24 years; from 25 to 44 the females; from 45 to 69 
the males; and from 70 onward, the females. 

A comparison of male and female major and minor offenders adds 
UtUe of vi^ue to what has already been said. 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 241 

In viewing these age statistics it should be borne in mind that the 
immigrant prisoners can not be properly compared with the native, 
because of the lai^er proportion of adults in the general immigrant 
population than in the general native population. The distribution 
of the earlier ages is therefore greater in the native population than 
in the immigrant, and the ages of the general population must some- 
what determine the ages of persons committed to penal institutions. 
Thus the apparent indication of the figures shown in the census report 
on prisoners that the native-bom tend to commit crime at an earlier 
age than the foreign-bom is largely (if not wholly) due to the more 
advanced age of the foreign-bom in this country. It would be 
xmwise to assert that the immigrant criminals commit offenses at 
more advanced ages than the native, for no comparison has been 
made on the basis of age groups in tne population. 

CITIZENSHIP. 

Accurate statistics of citizenship might perhaps bring out some 
relation of naturalization to criminality among immigrants. The 
census figures, however, are too incomplete (and too questionable 
in character «) to afford evidence that is entirely satisfactory. The 
probability exists that some of the answers were untrue, while the 
presence of a large number of cases in which no reply was obtained 
regarding citizenship seriously affects the value of those in which 
replies were returned. In the United States at large the political 
status of 17.6 per cent of the male immigrant prisoners was not 
stated. In the several geographical divisions tne percentage of 
such cases varied from 12.8 per cent in the North Atlantic to 39.9 
per cent (or more than a thira) in the South Atlantic. Thus in each 
of the groups of States the political status of at least one-eighth of 
all male prisoners of foreign birth was unknown, while in four of 
the five divisions such ignorance applied to over one-fifth, and in 
one it reached more than one-third. The census figures therefore 
can not be relied upon as giving complete testimony regarding tne 
citizenship of immigrant prisoners. 

a ' ' The facts are usually not a matter of prison record, but must be obtained from 
the prisoners themselves, who sometimes iraafine it advantageous to claim a citizen- 
ship they have not attained." — ^Prisonere and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 
1904,. p. 47. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



242 



The Immigration G>mmission. 



Jl"^ 



I 

I 



S 



III 









III] 
























Ooptn 



III 


















B 



«0 1-4 00(0 



oot^tooo 



C«0fl0*0 



oicookr^ 



!2» *si 






o»eo«oo< 



t^OO'Ti-i 



aor««o 


















(OO't'O 



^rooe4 



^(OiOtO 



•00(0 00 



•oa0(O*H 






!0t»00 

no6e4<d 



oooo^F^ 



ga^jS 






^o6«^ 






•ot>.ooo 



e^-HOOOk 






m 

3«£ o 





o 

s' 


32.3 
40.3 
3.1 
24.2 




o 


22.8 
17.6 
6.3 
64.4 




o 


16.3 
46.7 
6.8 
32.1 




o 


28.6 

30.6 

1.7 

30.3 




o 


«o*o«« 




o 


34.1 
46.4 
2.6 
18.0 




o 


66.2 

31.2 

4.8 

8.8 




o 


66.7 

17.2 

1.8 

16.4 




o 






^ 


O (9 (9 Q 


< 
o 


o 


60.1 
22.9 
2.4 
14.6 


H 


o 


62.0 
28.9 
3.8 
16.8 




o 

8 


36.7 
38.6 
3.4 
21.3 




o 

§ 


48.4 

17.3 

3.2 

31.1 




© 
8 


18.7 

46.4 

6.0 

30.0 




o 

8 


29.4 
28.6 
2.1 
38.9 




O 

8 


41.6 

44.0 

1.7 

12.8 




O 


36.6 
43.2 
2.7 
17.6 




i 


1 


i 


1 


'1 

■J 

t 

z 





Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 243 

Naturalized prisoners (according to Table 132) outnumbered alien 

Srisoners in the United States as a whole and in the North Atlantic, 
forth Central, and Western divisions. In the two Southern divi- 
sions the aliens were more numerous than the naturalized immi- 
grant prisoners, but in these two divisions the niunber of •foreign- 
bom male prisoners was so small as to be insignificant in comparison 
with the nimiber in the other three divisions of the coimtry. In the 
whole continental United States 31,196 male prisoners of foreign 
birth were conmutted during 1904. Only 664 of these, or 2.1 per 
cent, were committed in the Southern States. It is also worthy 
of note that in the South Atlantic division nearly two-fifths (39.9 
per cent) of the foreign-born male prisoners failed to report as to 
citizenship, while in the South Central nearly one-third (31.1 per 
cent) failed to report. 

The largest percentage of naturalized piisoners was found in the 
North Central States, 45.4 per cent. In this division the percentage 
of aliens was smaller than m any other division, being only 18.7 per 
cent; but as the political status of 30 per cent of all the foreign-bom 
male prisoners was unknown the actual proportion of aliens might 
well have been much greater. In the North Atlantic States it was 
41.5 per cent, while the proportion of naturaUzed prisoners was 44 

Ser cent, or only 1.4 per cent less than in the North Central division, 
►ut in the North Atlantic division the political status was unknown 
in only 12.8 per cent of the cases, as compared with 30 per cent in the 
North Central. 

Not only was the largest percentage of naturaUzed persons found 
amon^ the foreign-bom male prisoners of the North (Jentral States, 
but eSso the largest percentage of those who had filed first papers. 
In these States 6 per cent of all the male immigrant prisoners had 
filed their fiirst papers, while in no other division did the reports 
show a larger percentage than 3.4 per cent (as in the Western divi- 
sion). First papers were least common among prisoners in the 
North Atlantic States, only 1.7 per cent being reported as having 
filed them. 

The separation of major and minor offenders makes an interesting 
comparison possible. Aliens considerably outnumbered naturalized 
persons among the major offenders in the United States, considered 
as a whole, and in each of the geographical divisions except the North 
Central. In the country at large aliens composed over half (52 per 
cent) of the entire number of male immiOTant major offenders. In 
the North Atlantic, South Central, and Western divisions the pro- 
portion was greater than this, and even in the North Central States, 
where it was least, it was 30.9 per cent. When these figures are 
compared with those of minor offenders they become more strilring. 
While aliens predominated among the major offenders, naturalized 
persons were more in evidence among the minor offenders. In the 
country as a whole and in each division except the South Central 
the naturalized minor offenders outnumbered the alien. But more 
striking than this is the fact that in each division, without excep- 
tion, the percentage of major offenders who were aliens exceeded 
the percentage of minor offenders who were aliens, while the per- 
centage of naturalized persons among the major offenders was less 
than among the minor offenders. The figures thus point without 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



244 The Immigration Commission. 

contradiction to the ^eater tendency of aliens to commit the major 
crimes and of the cnminality of the naturalized immigrant to con- 
sist more largely of minor offenses. As is noted in the census 
report, '^ the fact that aliens predominate among major offenders and 
not amotig the minor is in accord with the fact * * * that 
f oreijpi-bom prisoners who had resided in the country for five years or 
less formed 27 per cent of the major offenders and only 13.4 per cent 
of the minor offenders." ** 

The presence of prisoners under 21 years of age among the foreign- 
bom males might well suggest the value of not only surveying the 
statistics of immigrant male prisoners of all ages, but more especially 
those 21 or more years of age. The presence of a large number 
xmder 21 years might considerably reduce the possible percentage 
of naturahzed persons. But on examination oi the general table 
upon which the above percentages are based it is foimd that only 
2,158, or 6.9 per cent, of the 31,196 male inunigrant prisoners were 
xmder 21 years of age. An examination of the percentages for 
prisoners 21 years old or over also reveals Uttle deviation in essen- 
tials from the proportions shown for all prisoners considered without 
regard to a^e. No separate discussion of those prisoners who had 
reached their majority is therefore necessary. 

Figures coupling political condition with years of residence in the 
United States womd be of greater value than those of citizem^p and 
age only, for from the preceding table it is impossible to determine 
what proportion of the aliens were such from force of circumstances — 
that is, brevity of residence in this coimtry — or in how far the nat- 
, uralized had been limited by lack of sufficient years in the United 
States. Such coupling of periods of residence with poUtical condi- 
tion is not; however, afforded by any census tables, and the figures 
shown above must suffice. 

LITERACY. 

> Literacy statistics are frequently misleading. A person barely 
able to read and write is classed as Uterate, no matter how great 
his ignorance beyond this mere power to make and decipher letters 
may be. All grades of education and ability are thus grouped 
together. Persons highly illiterate (in the broad sense) may be 
included among the Uterates. The chief value of such statistics lies 
in their disclosure of those who could neither read or write — ^who 
were whoUy illiterate. Such use of the table following is the only 
one that can profitably be made here. 

o Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions; 1904, p. 48. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



245 



I 



i 

8 
8 

1 



"§• 



i 
1 



ii ° 

1 ^ 



^ 



s 
=1 



ft, 



H 



"8 

s 



S 



il 



I 



II 






§^ 



II* 



Hi 



I 



I 



Ii 






e^ 



«DCOCOOO O 

SJ5«^S«^ 8 



SS5«;S«^ 8 



flgJ-^S * 8 



•ookoOf-ieo o 



COI«Ot« 



•OC0t»<OCI o 









fed-^S * 8 









ciaoc>i<co o 

aij5«<s«« 8 



S§J«S** 8 



«.ee«A e. 



SS^-^ei * 8 












cso>otot« o 
gd^ti • g 



teaoMtoo o 
^t^wi^ ' d 



ssd-^s * 8 



ooooao-^ o 












«ec«o»coo 



•dddodf-S 









I 



a 

is SI 



si 

..Ill 

53 5 1 1 

1^ 



il 

Pi 

lis 

IP! 



5 



J 

S 

I 
I 

i 
I 

I 



3 

a 

I 

I 



I 



8 

i 

1 



I 

1 



I 



Digitized by 



Google 



246 



The Immigration Commission. 



:t 



8 



1 



i 
1 

2> 



04 § W 

n o 



o 



•■g 



^ 



pq 

< 



3 



a 

I 



1 

o 

3 



III 



I^ 



iz 



pi 
III 



■si • 
a I* 



!• 



I* 






I 



-3 



la 



I 

i 






sit: itf"^ 8 









SS-^ ' '8 8 









■^c^ 8 






g« -rf • g 



2« '•^^' 8 



e<9«OtO*H>H O 
C9 CO 00 CO O 



coooo'^io o 
S5* '*^'* 8 



ooooo o 
^o^oo g 



•OxiCtOk^ 



^S'^ ^ 



oeo •001^ 

2t£ it:^ 



o<c«coo*o 



o» «e c* ■«< u) 



t»eo^a»o 






eoe4 *.-I?rf 



a» •-• r« ■<•• a» o 






o»ao<oc«eo 
coexj *«oe>i 



C0 0(0 0»0< 

g«6 'c<«6 









cotoooao 









eoo>o«or^ 






^eook^co 






C4eoaOM3*o 



co>oeoeoc« 



iOCl>Ot«CO 

<5(^^^eo 



s 

b CB 



SI 



si 

111 






iMIsI I 

si 3i^ 



il 

is 

^ a 

9 k ea 

si! 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



247 









• f^OO o 









SS^'a** 8 



SSi«5{^ 



eoeoot>»io o 

SfS'^S^ 8 



0000(000^ o 

SS^'^S** 8 






a»ioioo<o o 

^-^ '-^^ 8 



OiOiOOO 



ococ9or« o 

gsa-^a-^ 8 



^2^06^ 8 









^ c4 * w 



^8 8 






S« '*^* * 8 












^ci -n ' g 



c«>ooioeo 



g^ •'rfoi g 



C400001-4O O 

g'^ ''^•'' 8 






^^ -cod g 



g^ -e^e^ g 






ec r- xi a:- — - o 
rgo6 't«^co g 



ggod -^I^ ^ 






SSi'^d'^ 8 



82-^3^ 8 



dto^toeo 



n 

5 SI 
III 



III 



^1 



n 






II 



3S 



«i 
11 

111 

HI 



.11 

3a a 



as 3i 



|3 



r 



Digitized by 



Google 



248 The Immigration Commission. 

For comparing the various aspects of a single group of persons (as, 
for example, juvenile delinquents born of American fathers) all cases 
should of course be included m the sum upon which percentages are 
based, even the number of cases m which no answer was obtained 
to the inquiry. But when several distinct groups are to be compared, 
only such data as are known and are comparable in the several 
groups should be included in the bases upon which percentages are 
computed. Thus, cases the character of which is not specified should 
be eliminated, as they may in fact consist of at least two distinct 
and specifiable kinds of data, and in so far as these proportions 
vary for the several groups of persons will the percentages of specified 
data be invalidated as means of comparison. 

The census table presented errs in this manner, in that cases in 
which literacy was not stated are added, in computing the per- 
centages, to those in which specification was made. Now the pro- 
portion of cases of "literacy not stated" varies greatlv in the several 
nativity and parentage groups. Obviously, any wide variations in 
an unknown quantitv (Tot "literacy not stated" might be in fact 
either "literate" or "illiterate") renders any comparison based on 
the percentages given so much subject to error as to necessitate the 
constant bearing in mind of this factor. 

A wide difference is found in the figures between the iUiteracy of 
native prisoners and prisoners born abroad. Of the native pris- 
oners, 3.7 per cent* were unable either to read or to write; of the inmii- 
grant prisoners 19 per cent were unable either to read or to writ«. 
Such a difference is striking and too great to be wholly erroneous. 
With regard to the native prisoners of native and of foreign parentage 
the fact appears that the former were slightly more ilBterate than 
the latter. That is, the American-bom children of immigrants who 
were committed to penal institutions in 1904 had relatively fewer 
persons among them unable to read and write than had the children 
of natives.* 

Another interesting condition is shown by the figures separating 
prisoners into major and minor offenders. In the case or natives 
(of both native and foreign parentage) and of immigrants, the true 
illiterates (those who could neither read nor write) occurred in larger 
proportion among the major offenders than among the minor offenders. 

Illiteracy was m general more common among the female prisoners 
than among the male. The only exception occurred among the 
foreign-bom major offenders. A larger percentage of female than 
of male native major and minor offenders of both native and foreign 
parentage were unable to read or write. . Of the foreign-born prisoners 
those who could neither read nor write were more common among the 
female minor offenders than among the male, but slightly less com- 
mon among the female major offenders. 

<* A possible explanation of this (inasmuch as the difference is not great) lies in 
the greater concentration of the immigrant population in the cities, where educa- 
tional adTantages were greater than in the rural districts. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 349 

3. JuvENu^ Delinquents Enumerated June 30, 1904. 

In four of the tables showing the statbtics of juvenile delinquents 
enumerated June 30, 1904, data touching upon immigrant delin- 
quency appear. 

NATIVrrT, COLOR, AND SEX. 

In Table 134 the niunerical and per cent distribution is shown by 
nativity and color for each sex in tne several geographical divisions 
of the continental United States. 

78340^— VOL 36— U ^17 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



260 



The Immigmtioa Commission. 






.s 



5" 



8 



^ 



8 g 
I * 

I 

4S 



1 

.3 



•I 



e5 











8 G 


I 9 


• 


9 9 : : 1 




g 


il 




4 ^ 




^ 


i i 


E i» 


S S"- 




» 


» 


'^ 






1 


§ I 


3 IIS 


1 *="" 






H 


^ f 


'4 w^ 




3. 


^1 


S 1 


\ §- 


i S S i i 




u 


^ 


1 ; 


1 %' 


S 2:: 




f 


S 








^ 


§ 1 


1 Ss 


: § §ii 


1 




& 








h 


i| 






5 i'^ 


i § 8j- 


iS 


i 1 


! gr 


1 lis 


V 


j 


kS^ k 


r V 






:^ 


§||l 


1 25^ 


s §:s 


.9 




H 


od U 


s ® 


^ -^ : 


f 


<^l 


si: 


3 £a« 

■I »i4 


s sii 


1 


5 - 


i 8- 


S gja 


^ 


S I 


1 gs 


$ gis 






o 


er - 






^1 
r 


^1 


2 5 


1 p* 


§ n\\ 


1 




1 ss- 


i §ia 




^ 


• g i 


1 11- 


i iia 






& 


g s 


f «r-f 




1 


4 






i si- 


4 


S i 


1 SS" 


ll S"" 




|qq 


S 


aj J/ 


f i"^ 


ef ef 




1 


1 


ill 

S 2 






1 








;g 


I i i : 


■p 








•o 




1 




1 




el 


• • i • 


•o 




s 




■§? 


; :s : 


s 




1 

2 


1 2b<2 


lored-. .- 

Negro.. 
Mongoli 
Indian. 










^ 






S 1 



t i 



8 == 



to 


Ok 

SI 








r<. 






o 


3 




»o 
q6 


o6 • • 


o 


1* 




o6 




o 


1^ 


*«0 

S5 ' 


eo 


eo '» 

^ : 




o 


to 


t-oo 


to 


to '. 




o 


•o 


o»«o 


to 


to I 
CO 1 




o 


00 


*-* 




d i 


^ 


o 


to 




eo ' 


eo 


o 


i 




S : 


« 


o 


€4 


a- 


00 


00 '' 




o 


o 


^00 


o 


O ' 

t : 


o 


o 


o 

s 




o 

si 


i j 


Ok 


o 

i 


9 


o»toeo eo 


^ : 




o 


00 

S! 


MO e« 


r<^ I 


' 


o 


i 




00 1 


"■ 


o 


o 




o • 

- i 


^ 


o 

i 


eo 




•« «0 


o 


eo 




•O M 


i 


i 


1 


1 


1 

1 

c 

1 


• 


1 


,i 


i 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 251 

Out of a total of 23,034 juvenile delicjuents enumerated, 17,989, 
or 78.1 per cent, were whites of native birth, while 1,874, or 8.1 per 
cent, were whites bom abroad. The remaining 3,171, comprising 
13.8 per cent of the total number, were either colored (negro, Mon- 
golian, or Indian) or whites of unknown nativity. When the sexes 
are considered separately it is found that a slightly larger percentage 
of the male delinquents were whites of forei^ birth than of the two 
sexes in the aggregate. The former proportion was 8.6 per cent and 
the latter, as staged above, 8.1 per cent. Converselv, the propor- 
tion of foreign-bom whites was less in the group of female delin- 
quents than m the aggregate of the two sexes. White immigrants 
composed 6.4 per cent of all female delinquents and 8.1 per cent of 
the total number of delinquents of both sexes. 

Of the 3,162 colored delmquents, 3,112 were negroes, 2 were Mon- 
goUai^, and 48 were Indians. The first comprised 13.5 per cent of 
uie total number of delinquents, or a much larger proportion than 
the foreign-bom whites (8.1 per cent). In the group of males the 
negroes composed 13.4 per cent and in the group of females 14 
per cent, thus following the rule of the native whites in the distri- 
DUtion of sexes. The opposite was true of the foreign-bom and sug- 
gests the probable presence of a considerablv larger proportion of 
males than of females in the juvenile general population of foreign 
bu-th. 

By far the largest part of the immigrant juvenile delinquents 
(those of foreign birth) were found in 9ie North Atlantic States. 
Of the total 1,874 such delinquents in the United States, 1,410 were 
enumerated in institutions situated in this geographical division. 
It is true also that a larger number of native-bom juvenile delinquents 
were found in this group of States than in any other, but the rela- 
tively large proportion of the delinauents in mese States who were 
of foreign birth is specially noticeable, being 13 per cent, as com- 
pared with 4.7 per cent m the North Central division, 4.7 per cent 
m the Western, 1.6 per cent in the South Central, and 0.9 per cent in 
the South Atlantic. 

IMMIOBANT AND NATIVE WHITES. 

In Table 135 is shown for each State and geographical division the 
percentage of white juvenile delinquents who were of native and of 
foreign birth. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



252 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 135. — Per cent distribution of white juvenile delinquents of hnovm nathrity 
enumerated June 30^ 1904, 6y nativity and by States and Territories, 



State or TtRltory. 


White Juvenile 
delinquents o f 
known nativity 
enumefated June 
a0,19O4. 




Per cent 
native. 


Percent 

foreign- 

bom. 


Contineatal United States 


90. S 


9.4 






North Atlantic dlTialon 


85.9 


14.1 






Mnine - 


93.3 
91.2 
94.9 
88.4 
84.4 
89.5 
84.6 
87.0 
88.9 

98.6 


6.7 


New Hammhire ,.^^-t..t, r 


8.8 


Vermont 


5.1 


If anacJiiieetti 


11.6 


Rhode bland 


15.6 


Oonnefftlmt. t , . ^ , - r . 


19.5 


New York 


15.4 


NewJeiBoy 


13.0 


PflOnSylVUlia r.........rirf«Tr, 


ILl 


Bonth A tkHitk} division 


1.4 






Delaware 


100.0 
100.0 
96.9 

94.6 




liarylaod 


2.2 


District of Columbia. 




Virginia. 




WMt Virginia. 


1.1 


Oeonria... 




FSSSa^";:™;;:::;::::;:::::::::::::::!:;!:::!:;!^ 




North Central division 


5.4 






Ohio.... 


96.5 
96.4 
90.3 
90.4 
89.8 
96.8 
99.2 
96.4 

96.9 
97.6 


4.5 


Indiana. 


1.6 


niinOUl - , T . T , r r T 


9.7 


M1rh1e«v.... 


9.6 


Wiffcoruifn ,,--,,-,-._ 


10.2 


Mlrnieeota 


1.2 


lo^^ , , 


.8 


Missouri 


1.6 


North Dakota 


(•) 


Booth Dakota 




N«»Hwka.. 


5.1 


Kansas 


1.1 


south Central di vision 


2.4 






Kentucky , 


100.0 
96.8 

94.8 




T(^nnnf!?(¥. ,.,,.--.-. ,,.,..-, 


3.2 


Alabama. 




I/MiMana r 


(•) 


Western division 


5.2 






Montana 




(•) 


Colorado : 


1.6 


Arizona ,-.-, t ,.,-,.,.. 


(«) 


Utah.. . 


(«) 


W«lh}»»gtOP . . r - - T - - . ,-,-,---,-,, 


^7.2 


Oregon.^ 


(«) 


CaUIomia 


^4.6 







a Per cent not shown where base is less than 100. 

In the United States 19,863 white juvenile delinquents of known 
nativitv were enumerated. Of this number, 17,989, or 90.6 per cent, 
were of native birth and 1,874, or 9.4 per cent^ were immigrants. In 
the North Atlantic division a larger proportion of immigrants was 
foimd than in any other group of States, being 14.1 per cent as com- 

?ared with 5.4 per cent in tne North Central, 6.2 per cent in the 
?^estem, 2.4 per cent in the South Central, and only 1.4 per cent in 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 263 

the South Atlantic. In six of the nine North Atlantic States over 10 
per cent of all white juvenile delinquents were bom abroad, the pro- 
portions in these six States ranging from 11.1 per cent in Pennsylvania 
to 19.5 per cent in Connecticut. It is further noteworthy that these 
six States form a connected geo^i^hical group. They are Massa- 
chusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersev, and 
Pennsylvania, or thos6 States of the North Atlantic division having 
large proportions of immigrants in their; population. Maine, New 
Hampshire, and Vermont, which of the North Atlantic States had the 
smallest proportion of persons of foreign birth in their population, 
likewise nad smaller proportions of immigrants among their white 
juvenile delinquents tnan any other States of the same geographical 
division. 

Outside of the North Atlantic division but one State had more than 
10 per cent of its white juvenile delinquents of foreign birth. This 
was Wisconsin, which had 10.2 per cent. Furthermore, there were 
only five States outside of the North Atlantic division having over 
6 per cent of their white juvenile delinquents of foreign birth. Four 
of these were in the North Central division: Wisconsin, 10.2 per cent; 
Illinois, 9.7 per cent; Michigan, 9.6 per cent; and Nebraska, 5.1 per 
cent. The nfth State was Washington, with 7.2 per cent. The fact 
that only these five States outside the North Atlantic division had 
more than 1 in every 20 white juvenile delinquents belonging to the 
immiOTant class is the more striking when it is observed that every 
one of the North Atlantic States had more than 1 in every 20, while 
six of them had more than 1 in every 10. 

RATIO TO POPULATION. 

In Table 136 is shown for each State and geographical division the 
number of juvenile delinquents in 1904, classified oy sex, color, and 
nativitjr, for each 100,000 of population in 1900. The table also 
shows similar data for 1890, when do th juvenile delinquents and gen- 
eral population were enumerated in the same year. 

The change in the number and geographical distribution of insti- 
tutions during the fourteen years between the two enumerations of 
juvenile delinquents makes any comparison of the figures for the two 
enumerations untrustworthy, while tne fact that the ratios in the one 
case are based upon the population of the same year and in the other 
upon that of four years earlier increases the dmculty of accurately 
interpreting the figures. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



254 



The ImmigratiiMi G>ininission. 



1 




«Q 




^ 




1 






d 


,^ 


a 


'^ 








S 


J 


1 




^ 


8- 


8 


9 


^ 


i 



s 



§ 



i 









I 



i 

I 



i 



ti 



T, 



I 



Mi 

































^o»too^e9eoo*0 lO 






*5S 



"SS 



^aS^ 



ooo 






S • ijj : : «« 






0000»QOO«0(0 Ol 









S'*'*^:Ss3«''* 



e«t^ooot«»«aee9 









iti$imUsiii 



<-iOOI«00>0«0«0 



e« «o « t« *e «o«r»«o 



eoeoooc«r«t^eo«o 



« le lo Ok r« a» cQ io lo 






<o«oekC9«t^»OiHt« 



I 



5?" 



H 
pq 

e3 



I ? Isii 

I 






3^:z:p^ 6 



2 . 

I 






1^ 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



265 






fe^<4l d 



»00 00 

Sri «< 









8Ssi 






»0^ 00 









«0 00 






td 






96 ^ 



^ ^ 



^ 4 






t««H^.oo 






00 CO 



^&^-* i 



•oaeeoook 



M^oooweoeo 



t»^OM»O«0C« 



« t>» CO o» 00 CO e 



0000 'COOO 







Digitized by 



Google 



256 The Immigration Cominission. 

In 1904 there were, according to the enumeration, 59.9 juvenile 
delinquents to every 100,000 persons found in the United States in 
1900. For every 100,000 white persons of foreign birth in the 
countrjr in 1900, there were 18.4 white immigrant juvenile deUn- 
quents in institutions on June 30, 1904. The ratios of both the whit^ 
of native birth and the colored, without regard to nativity, greatly 
exceeded this, the former being 31.8 and the latter 34.4. 

The greatest ratio of both native and foreign white delinquents 
was in the North Atlantic States. For every 100,000 native whites 
in the population of 1900, there were enumerated 54.2 native white 
juvenile aelinguents in 1904- for every 100,000 iminigrant whites in 
the 1900 population, 29.8 white juvenile delinquents in 1904 who were 
inmiigrants. The colored juvenile delinquents also figured more 
prommentlv in the North Atlantic States than in any other group, 
the ratio of such delinquents to the colored population of 1900 being 
208.9. The smallest ratios were in the South Central States; they 
were 4.4 for the native whites, 2.8 for the immigrant whites, and 4.6 
for the colored. 

.Of the individual States, Rhode Island had the largest ratio to 
population of native white juvenile delinquents and Connecticut 
the largest ratio of foreign-bom white juvenile delinquents. The 
former was 95 and the latter 49.7. Connecticut also had the largest 
ratio of colored juvenile delinquents, or 606.4. 

In two of the States, and in two only, the ratio of the immigrant 
whites exceeded that of the native whites and of the colored. These 
two States were Tennessee and Louisiana. In the former the ratio 
of the immigrant white juvenile delinquents was 34.1 to every 
100,000 of the inmiigrant white population in 1900, as compared with 
12.1 for the native whites and 11.7 for the colored; in the latter State 
the ratio of the foreign-bom whites was 7.7, of the native whites 2.8, 
and of the colored 2. 

In comparing the figures of the two enumerations it is at once 
noticeable that in 1890 the largest ratio of foreign-bom juvenile 
delinquents to foreign-born population was in the South Atlantic 
States, instead of in the North Atlantic as in 1904, although the 
largest ratio of the native whites was in the latter group of States at 
both census periods. 

It is further noticeable that in 14 States the ratio of fore^-bom 
white juvenile delinquents to foreign-born white population was 
greater in 1890 than at the taking of the next census, while in 7 
States the ratio of white juvenile delinquents of native birth to the 
native white population was greater in 1890 than in 1904. Moreover, 
in 9 States the census of 1890 showed a larger ratio of white juvenile 
delinquents regardless of nativitv to the general population of cor- 
responding character than was found fourteen years later. These 
comparisons are of course affected by the diflFerence in the time of 
the enumeration of the general population and of the enumeration 
of juvenile delinquents at the Twelfth Census, as well as by changes 
between 1900 and 1904 in the number of institutions and in methods 
of dealing with the juvenile offender. But the comparisons are 
valuable as showing the possible lack in juvenile deunquency of 
tendencies traceable to nativity. To more clearly bring out the varia- 
tions in the ratios of the two census periods, the excesses of 1890 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



257 



over 1904 are summarized in the following table, which shows figures 
only for those States in which such excesses occurred: 

Table IS7. —Number ojf juvenile ddinquejUe per 100,000 of population, 1890 and 1904^ 
in States in which the ratio for 1890 exceeded that for 1904y by nativity. 



state. 


Total. 


Native. 


Foreign. 


1880. 


1904. 


1890. 


1904. 


1890. 


1904. 


Mftf iv^ 










21.6 
20.8 
19.6 


16.1 


Now Hampshire 










18.2 


Mnssftohinetts 










14.4 


Connecticut 


75.5 
38.6 
83.6 
36.0 


67.8 
28.4 
79.8 
35.6 


92.0 
44.5 
86.9 


74.3 
82.4 

86.5 




New Jersey 


19.5 

67.6 

41.4 

9.6 

16.2 

13.1 

6.8 

7.9 

5.1 

4.1 


15.6 


Mi^ryf<^r>4 


18.3 


Ohio 


14.2 


Tnrllmifi 






7.8 




34.5 
21.1 


25.7 
19.9 


42.7 


30.7 


10.5 


]£lllIlQ90ta 


.8 


Iowa 






1.6 


Nebraska 


21.6 


15.0 


24.9 


17.1 


4.5 


lOssotiri 


3.7 


Kan5<4 . 










2.4 


Kentocky 


11.0 
3.4 


9.4 
3.2 


12.0 
3.5 


9.7 
3.2 




Louisiana 






Colorado 


17.0 


4.4 










• 





JUVENILE BELINQUENTS AND JUVENILE POPULATION. 

A comparison of immigrant juvenile delinquency with immigfant 
juvenile population is shown in Table 137. As the figures for the former 
are those of 1904 and for the latter those of 1900, the comparison is 
lacking in exactness. Another difference in the figures exists m the age 
limits — those of juvenile delinquency being 7 ana 21 years, while those 
of juvenile population are 10 and 19 j^ears. Although, as is stated in 
the census report, 94 per cent of the juvenile delinquents committed 
to institutions were between the ages of 10 and 19, the fact that 6 
per cent of them did not fall within these bounds detracts from the 
strict comparability of the figures given in the table. 

Tablb 138. — Number and per cent of foreign-bom among white juvenile delinquents of 
hnown nativity enumerated June SO, 1904, and in the general white population 10 to 19 
years of age, 1900, by geographic division. 





White juvenile delinquents 
of known nativity enumer- 
ated June 30. 1904. 


General white population 10 
to 19 years of age: 1900. 


DiYlfdon. 


Total. 


Foreign-bom. 


Total. 


Fopelgn-bom. 




Number. 


Percent. 


Number. 


Percent 


Continental United States 


19.863 


1,874 


9.4 


13,502,427 


873,311 


6.6 






North Ati«ntin 


10,016 
1,401 
6,920 
425 
1,101 


1,410 

20 

377 

10 

67 


14.1 
1.4 
6.4 
2.4 
6.2 


3,730,272 
1,483,339 
5,320,817 
2,261,131 
706,868 


476,635 
16.137 

304,768 
30,678 
45,093 


12.8 


South Atlantic 


1.1 


North Central 


5.7 


South Central '. 


1 4 


Western 


6.4 







Digitized by 



Google 



258 The Immigration Commission. 

In view of the rather heavy immigration from 1900 to 1904, the 
assumption ^'that the representation of native and foreign bom in 
the general population was about the same in 1904 as in^ 1900"' is 
harcfly warranted. Indeed, the difference between immigrant 
iuveime delinquency and immigrant juvenile population in the Imited 
States at large and in the North Atlantic States in partictdar is very 
probably due largely to differences in the immiCTant juvenile popula- 
tion of 1900 and 1904. It is evident that if the immigrant juvenile 
population were greater in 1904 than in 1900, the number of immigrant 
juvenile delinquents would probably be larger, and thus form a greater 
proportion of the total juvenile delinquency. 

As suggested in the census report, another cause of deceptive com- 
parison lies in the fact that while the North Atlantic States contrib- 
uted 50.4 per cent of the juvenile delinquents, they contributed only 
27.6 per cent of the general white {)opulation, and thus, because of 
the large proportion of immi^ants in them, they throw into undue 
prominence the immigrant juvenile delinquency of the country. 
Thus 9.4 per cent of all the white juvenile delinquents enumerated on 
June 30, 1904, were bom abroad, while only 6.5 per cent of the juvenile 
population of the country in 1900 was of foreign birth. 

In three of the geographical divisions of the country — the North 
Atlantic, the South Atlantic, and the South Central — the proportion 
of white juvenile delinquents who were bom abroad exceeded the 

Sroportion of the white juvenile population of foreign birth. In the 
forth Central and Western States, however, immigrants formed a 
smaller percentage of the juvenile delinquents than of the juvenile 
population. Therefore, the figures do not show, to quote the census 
report, ^*any markedly greater criminal tendency among the foreign- 
bom youth than among the native."** And this in spite of the feet 
that the population figures used as the basiB of comparison probably 
favor the native-bom by showing a smaller proportion of persons of 
foreign birth than was in the country at the time the enumeration of 
juvenile delinquents was made. 

4. Juvenile Delinquents CoMMmBD During 1904. 

COLOR, NATIVITT, AND SEX. 

The distribution by color, nativity, and sex of juvenile delinquents 
committed to institutions during 1904 is shown for the several geo- 
graphical divisions in the table next submitted. * 

A Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 232. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



ImmigraticMi and Crime. 



259 



I. 



8 

to: 

I 

I 

8 

45 

6 

I 






H 

•J 

j3 



i 
I 

s 



I 









I 
I 



i2 






I 



•a 
is 



1 
1 

I 



^1 



I 



3 



3 



^1 



3 
5 



i| 






"•a 



3 



4 



I 



3 

O 



5:?5« g 



§2g5 8S« !? 



5il*^-^ 



2|S5?3 •'•-" S 



1885 2-- g 



|§2S S5« 



Sli» ggs I 



S§gi §S^ 



5j5|r-^ 



l^es "S 



S|8S5 «S 



§Sg^ s%^ SS 



§S2S £g« S 



;lii is^ § 



geii §§ 



s s 






i 






li 






I 



2 £z § za.3 

S 



ill 



Digitized by 



Google 



260 



The ImmigradoD Commission. 



o 

3 

I 

o 



'^3 



I 



:1 



8 2 

Is 
■i I 



1 



'TO 

•a 



1^ 









J 



S 

5: 



5 

s 



•5 

1 



I 



3 
^ 






a 



s 



^6 



I 



3 



i| 



i 



i 






I 



3 






I 



3 



1^^ 



I 



3 



I a e « o « o « 



rooo»o» ococo CO 






5. 5, 



^5- 



Doo e»>oe4 Ok 






«eot 















OC«U3 






eoa»'<roo 
godode4 



WW 



aoooc<<o 






Of-iOk 



^^^d 



tDOUd 



C40«CO 



uSui * «S 






fHl6^ 






coo'<r 
ee<5 * 









Mcoo» 



^ 






t^^'^ 
*-•« 



pi. 

ipi 






i:2!;u,Sf^ 






ill 






Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 261 



The largest number of juvenile delinquents was committed in the 
North Atlantic States. Of the 11,814 persoiis committed in all 
parts of the United States, 6,622 were committed in the North Atlantic 
division. The North Central States had the next largest number — 
4,056 — while the South Central had the smallest — 648. Not onlv 
did the greatest number of commitments take place in the North 
Atlantic division, but among the persons committed in that division 
was a lai^er number who were immigrants and the American-bom 
children of immigrants than among mose committed in any other 
division. Indeed, the presence of the immigrant and his children 
was most marked in tms group of States. Of the 2,947 luvenUe 
delinquents bom in the United States of immigrant parents who were 
conamitted to institutions in all parts of the country, 1,909, or more 
than two-thirds, were committed in the North Atlantic States, and 
of the 1,116 juvenile delinquents of foreign birth who were committed 
throughout the United States, 841, or 73.5 per cent, were committed 
in tJie same geographical division. Of persons of native birth and 
parentage, the lai^est number was committed in the North Central 
States, as was also the largest number of negro delinquents. 

Considering each geographical division as a unit, the largest pro- 
portion of white juvenile delinquents who were of native birth was 
m the Western division, being 86.7 per cent. Persons bom in the 
United States of native parents, however, occurred in largest propor- 
tion among the juvenile delinquents committed in the South Central 
States; in those States 64.6 per cent of all juvenile delinquents com- 
mitted belonged to this class, as compared with 49.1 per cent in the 
Western States, which ranked second. The American-bom children 
of immigrants were found in neatest proportion among thedelin- 

auents of the North Atlantic States, 34.6 per cent of all juvenile 
elinquents committed in those States having been bom in the 
United States of immigrant parents. In the same group of States 
was found the largest proportion of immi^ants themselves. More 
than 1 in every 7 (15.2 per cent) of the juvenile delinquents com- 
mitted in the North Atlantic division were of foreign birth. In no 
otiier group of States was the proportion greater than 1 in every 18 
(being 6.5 per cent in the Western States). 

In the census of juvenile delinquents committed during 1904 the 
figures showing sex was so largely determined by the character of 
the various institutions and by the manner of dealing with the sexes 
in the several States that any discussion of them would be likely to 
be misleading. The sex element may therefore be disregarded, 
except when some clearly defined difference between the statistics of 
the sexes appears. 

IMMIGRANT AND NATIVE WHITES. 

A better means of comparing immigrants and natives than that 
afforded by the preceding table is given in Table 140, which shows 
for each State the per cent distribution by nativity of white juvenile 
delinquents of known nativity committed during the year 1904. 
Bv excluding from this computation colored persons and persons 
of unknown nativity, the native and immigrant whites are thrown into 
clearer contrast and the influence of extraneous elements upon the 
figures is avoided. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



262 



The Immigration Commissicxi. 



Table 140. — Per cent diatribtUion of white juvenile ddinquaiU ofhnown nativity oomr 
mitted during 1904t by nativity and by States and Territoriee, 



State or Territc^. 


White jovenUe de- 
linqnents of 
known nativity 
committed dur* 
ingl004. 




Percent 
native. 


Percent 
foreign. 


CoDtliMntsl United States 


89.0 


ILO 






Nort»» Atlaiitk?^MiTh>Ti 


83.7 


16.3 






U*«n« , , , . , , . 


1. 

78.6 
83.7 
8a9 
91.8 
9a4 

96.3 


(») 


New Hampshire .* 


(4 


Vermont..* 


(•) 




12.1 


Fh<Ml^TsIan^ .. 


21.4 


OonDeoticut. r 


16w3 


New York 


19.1 


New Jersey 


8.7 


Pennsylvania 


9.6 


Sooth Atlantic division 


3.7 






Delaware 


93.9 


"\,> 


MfwyiAT^rt 


District of Columbia 


(«) 


Vhvfnt^.. 


(«) 


Wi«t Vii^nlA , 


L7 


Oeorria... 


(•) 


Florida. .* 


North Central division 


6.1 






Ohio 


95.6 
98.8 
90.7 
92.4 
8&4 
91.6 
98.0 
96.6 

98.1 


4.4 


InAUat^ 


1.2 


nilnois 


9i3 


Micshigan 


7.6 




13.6 


Minnesota '/.'.'.'. , 


8.5 


Iowa 


2.0 


Missouri 


3.4 


North Dakota 


(•) 


South Dakota 


Nebraska '. 


^•^l 


i^v^mf 


Sooth Central division 


1.9 






Kentucky 


96.9 

iii 

94.0 


LI 


Tennessee ..... 




Alabama ', 




l^nfsiana x . . . . . ...... . 


(«) 
6.0 


Weetem division 






Montana.. 




^•^4 


Colorado ' V. 


Arixona 


(•) 


Utah ; 


Washington 


(•) 


Oregon 


California 


7.1 







a Per cent not si o :n where base is less than 100. 

Immigrant delinquents were most prominent in the North Atlantic 
States; 16.3 per cent of all white juvenile delinquents offaiown 
nativity who were committed during the year in these States were 
bom abroad. In no other geographical division was the proportion 
greater than 6.1 per cent, as in the North Central States, wnile it was 
as small as 1.9 per cent in the South Central division. Of individual 
States, Rhode Island had the largest percentage of immigrants among 
its white juvenile delinquents of known nativity. In that State one 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 



263 



out of every five — 21.4 per cent — of the white delinquents was an 
immigrant. New York was second in rank, having 19.1 per cent. 
In several States the proportion of immigrants was but little more 
than 1 in every 100 wnite delinquents, m Kentucky it was 1.1 per 
cent, in Indiana 1.2 per cent, and in Kansas 1.3 per cent. 

Such comparisons as the above, however, are valuable only as 
showing the relative presence of immigrant and native juvenile de- 
linquents in the several sections of the country. It does not afford 
anv means of accurately judging whether immigrants or natives con- 
tributed the more largely in relation to their representation in the 
population to the ran& of juvenile delinquencv. As is noted in the 
Census Report, the significance of the figures snown above — 

can perhaps be best brought out by compariiig them with the corresponding fifi:ures for 
the general white population 10 to 19 years of age, as is done for geographic divisions 
in the following tabular statement: « 





White Juvenile delinquents of 
known nativity committed 
during 1904. 


General white population 10 to 
19 years ofage: 1900. 


DlTlstOIL 


Total. 


Foreign-bom. 


Total. 


Forelgn-bom. 




Number. 


Percent. 


Number. 


Percent. 


Continental United States 


10,177 

5,157 
641 

3,422 
369 
588 


1,116 

841 
24 

209 

7 

35 


11.0 


13,502.427 


873,311 


6.6 


North Atlantic 


16.3 
3.7 
6.1 
1.9 
6.0 


3,730.272 
1,483,339 
5,320,817 
2,261,131 
706,868 


476,635 
16.137 

304,768 
80,678 
46,093 


12.8 


South Atlantic 


North Central 


6.7 


South Central 


1.4 


Western 


6.4 







The figures for continental United States are less favorable to the foreign-bom than 
those for any of the geographic divisions. This peculiarity is due to the fact tliat the 
North Atlantic division, in which the percentage of foreign-bom is high, contributed 
50.7 per cent of the white juvenile delmquents and only 27.6 per cent of the popiila- 
tion 10 to 19 years of age. The figures for continental United States, therefore, should 
not be used as a measure of the relative criminality of the native and the foreign bom.^ 

Such figures give the immigrant portion of the white juvenile delin- 
quents of known nativity committed throughout the country in 1904 
as 11 per cent. Yet in 1900 the immigrant portion of the general 
white population 10 to 19 years of age was only 6.6 per cent. A 
partial explanation of this difference is that given above, which shows 
the influence of the North Atlantic States upon the figures for the 
country at large. Additional explanation lies in the fact that immi- 
gration from 1900 to 1904 doubtless somewhat increased the immi- 
grant representation in the general white population of 10 to 19 years 
of age. It is doubtful, however, if these explanations adequately 
account for the wide difference between immigrant juvenile delin- 
quency and immigrant juvenile population. 

The figures for the juvenile delinquents in the separate geographic divisions are too 
small to be of much significance except in the North Atlantic and North Central 

a Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 238. The age group 
10 to 19 was selected ''because 94.4 per cent of the juvenile delmquents of known age 
committed during 1904 were within those ages." 

(Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 238. 



Digitized by 



Google 



264 The Immigration Commission. 

State8. In the North Atlantic States the foreign-bom form 16.8 per cent of the white 
juvenile delinquents and 12.8 per cent of the white population 10 to 19 years of a^, 
and in the North Central States the corresponding percentages are 6.1 of the delin- 

auents and 5.7 of the general population. From these figures it may be inferred that 
lie foreign-bom are contributmg to the juvenile delinauents slightly in excess of their 
representation in the general population. It should oe remembered, however, that 
the immigration between 1900 and 1904 may have increased the proportion of foreign- 
bom in the general white population 10 to 19 years of age, es^iecially in the Ncurth 
Atlantic division.^ 

PARENTAGE. 

In the Census Report are discussed the figures showing country of 
birth of foreign-born juvenile delinquents, but the very unequal immi- 
0:ation from the several countries during recent years makes the 
figures doubtful tools of comparison. Figures of greater importance 
are those which show the distribution by nativity of father of those 
juvenile delinquents having foreign-bom fathers. 

a Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 238, 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



265 



i 









h 

it 



1« 



H 

03 

ll 
5a 






I 



Hi 



I 



11^ 



I 



Hi 



I 



Hi 

Br 



Hi 



s 

p 

55 



I 






«ss«g8 ^Js^*' "-a^s 






s3SSS| 3993 $|a;i3 



S«8 



ootoco <ooo>oeo 



f<ro ^i-iMeo 






sgsag sg|s |S5s 






SSiSg 55g8 gssg 



5|Sg 



583 



79340'— VOL 36—11 ^18 



Digitized by 



Google 



266 The Immigration Commission. 



Even here wide differences in representation of the several nativities 
make comparisons of doubtful value. Conditions, regardless of their 
cause or meaning, are all that can safely be discussed. The thing 
most striking in the preceding table is the fact that the fathers of 
more than half the juvenile delinquents having foreign-bom fathers 
came from three countries — Ireland, Germany, and Italy. The 
fathers of one-fifth of the entire number of juvenile delinquents who 
were conmiitted throughout the country in 1904 came from Ireland; 
those of nearly as large a proportion (19.4 per cent) came from 
Germany; while practically one-sixth of all the juvenile delinquents 
having foreign-bom fathers were the children of Italian fathers. 
These three groups formed 56.3 per cent of all the juvenile delinquents 
in question. 

In the North Atlantic division of States 24 per cent had fathers 
bom in Ireland and 22.2 per cent had fathers of Italian birth. In 
each of the other geographical divisions for which percentages are 
given the largest proportion of foreign-bom fathers were from Ger- 
many, while the second in rank was the group coming from Ireland. 

OFFENSE AND PAKENTAOE. 

The most important thing to be known regarding juvenile delin- 
quents, as well as regarding prisoners, is the nature of their delinquent 
acts. So large a proportion of the juvenile delinquents committed in 
1904 were the children of immigrants and so small a proportion were 
imrriigrants themselves,* that in classifying the delinquents for 
comparison on the basis of relative frequency of offenses, the most 
illuminating classification is that of country oi birth of father regard- 
less of the country of birth of the delinquent himself. The com- 
parison then becomes one of parentage and not of nativity. In 
Table 142 the juvenile delinquents committed during 1904 are 
classified by country of birth of father and their per cent distribution 
shown by offense. This table makes possible a comparison of the 
children of native Americans with immigrants and the children of 
immigrants grouped together by country of origin. 

<* Of white delinquents of known nativity and parentage (including those of mixed 
parentage) the foreign-born composed 12.1 per cent ana the native-bom of foreign 
parentage 31.4 per cent — a total of 43.5 per cent. 



Digitized by CjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



267 



i 

5 



s 

I 



s 



I 



5l| 



o§ 



i 



I 
1 



ifr 






3 



1 



1^ 



C<COI»OM *o 



ratctf 



r» lO c» ts. h. Ok ^ 



M M h- « « CO « 






M^ec^«o 









ooMooco^^ eo 









C4^C4>OaDO M 

'o6u5ibroa6 ed 






c«oooc4eoeo C4 
'«e^o;d CO 






c<8«or* <e 









oei»-i ^ 





















^■^ • 



-r 









c«c« coa»c« 









-si 






• • • od«J • 



cooco 
u5s • 



««« 



f^<6 * 



^ ' c4«6 



^c6^ 



i 
o 

I 

I 



f-ioc»e»H loco iHOM 



co^*oc<« i<-ee to<oo 
'oiei '^^ * * io«di^ 



C4^>Or-i»Hto«D eo*o«o 

•r;j{ ■ • • • ►:«» • 



s !►. 



i 



a s 



I 



§1111- ! |go r §tg°^3^ 



Zt>i 



Digitized by 



Google 



268 The Immigration Commission. 

Accuracy of comparison is somewhat lessened by the retention in 
the totals upon which percentages are based of ''neglected ichildren^" 
''unclassified crimes," and *' offenses not stated." As these vary m 
proportion for the several classes of delinquents, so will the per- 
centages of known offenses vary. For example, the above table 
gives 33.9 per cent of the juvemle delinquents whose fathers were 
natives as guilty of offenses against property and 34.5 per cent of 
the juvenile deunauents whose fathers were immigrants as guilty 
of lite offenses. Yet when "neglected children," and persons com- 
mitted for "unclassified offenses" and "offenses not stated" are 
eliminated from the totals upon which these percentages are based, 
the result is, for the remaimng known classined offenses: Children 
of native fathers guilty of offenses against property, 39.9 per cent; 
children of foreign fathers, 38.8 per cent.^ Thus in the one case the 
larger percentage belong to the children of foreign fathers and in 
the other to those of native fathers. 

It 19 evident from this that in order to obtain results which are 
accurate, the entire table ought to be revised. This, however, 
would require considerable labor and is not necessary in order to 
make some general comparisons. 

If the possible variations due to the inclusion of neglected childreny 
unclassi&d offenses, and offenses not stated be borne in mind, this 
use of the unrevised figures need not result in the drawing of errone- 
ous conclusions. 

The two offenses, which according to Table 142 were most common 
among the juvenile delinquents committed in 1904, were incorrigi- 
bility and larceny. The clmdren of fathers of every nationality shown 
committed larceny with greater relative frequency than any other 
offense. Incorrigibility held second place in each of the parentage 
groups except the Canadian, Irish, and Italian j each of these had a 
larger percentage of truancy than of incorrigibility. Of these three 
principal offenses, English and Welsh children had the latest per- 
centage of commitments for incorri^bility (23.8 per cent), Canadian 
for truancy (21.2 per cent), and Poush for larceny (40 per cent). 

Considering the two main divisions of parentage — ^persons having 
native fathers and those having foreign fathers — ^larger percentages 
of juvenile delinquents whose fathers were bom in the United States 
than of those whose fathers came from abroad were committed for 
the following offenses: Vagrancy, incorrigibility, assault, arson, bur- 
glary, fraud. Larger percentages of delinquents who were children of 
immigrant fathers than of those who were children of native fathers 
were guilty of: Disorderly conduct, truancy, robbery, larceny. 

Grouping the juvenile delinquents shown in Table 142 according 
to the country or birth of the father, offenses against society formed 
a lai^er proportion of the unlawful acts of persons of Canadian, 
English and Wekh, German, Irish, Italian, and Russian, parentage 
than of persons bom of American fathers. Of the groups of foreign 
parentage, the Austrian and Polish were the only ones having smaller 
percentages than the group of native parentage. Offenses against 

o These percentages were computed from the figures shown in General Table 15, 
Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 282. by subtracting 
neglected children, unclassified offenses, and offenses not stated m>m the original 
toUds in order to form new bases. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 



269 



the person occurred in larger proportion among the crimes of persons 
of Canadian, German, and Polish parentage — the other foreign 
parentage groups being exceeded in percentage by persons of native 
parentage. Onenses against property occurred in larger proportion 
among Sie delinquent acts of persons of Austrian, Canadian, Polish, 
and Russian parentage than among those of persons having Ajnerican 
fathers. The largest percentage of offenses against society was that of 
persons whose fathers were bom in Italy, such crimes forming 66 per 
cent of all the offenses of this group of delinquents. Offenses against 
the person caused the commitment of a larger proportion of persons of 
Polish parentage than of any other group, this proportion being 8.4 
per cent. To the same group of delinquents, those whose fathers 
were bom in Poland, belong the largest percentage of offenders 
against property, or 51.1 per cent. 

The parentage group having the largest percentage of commit- 
ments for each of me principal offenses classined is shown below: 



Offense. 



Javenile dellnqaents oommltted daring 
1904. 



Nationality showing largest 
per cent oonvlctea for spe- 
cified offense. 



Per cent 
convicted. 



Dmnkenness 

Disorderly conduct. 

Vagrancy 

Inoorrigibility 

Truancy 

Assault 

Robbery 

Burglary. 

Larceny 



Poland 

Russia 

/Qeraiany 

\Poland 

England and Wales. 

Canada 

Poland 

....do 

....do 

....do 



0.5 
11.3 

6.8 

23.8 
21.2 
3.7 
4.7 
8.9 
40.0 



On the whole, persons guilty of serious violations of the law were relatively most 
numerous among the delinquents of Polish origin. Of the offenders whose fathers 
were bom in Italy, 9.2 per cent were committed for disorderly conduct, 20.4 per 
cent for truancy, and 27 per cent for larceny. The delinquents of Russian birth 
or origin had 11.3 per cent committed for disorderly ccmduct and a like percentage 
for txuancy, 13.6 per cent for incorrigibility, and 33.2 per cent for larceny. Amone 
the offenders of German and Irish origin the percentages formed by those committed 
for larceny were smaller than in the other groups, but the proportion sentenced for 
burglary was conspicuotis. Next to that for the Foles, the largest percentages formed 
by persons sentenced for crimes against the person were found among delinquents 
whose Others were bom in Germany and Ganada.o 

AGE. 

The ages of juvenUe delinquents committed during 1904, classified 
by sex, color, race, nativity, and parentage, are shown in the table 
on next page. 

a Prisoners and Juvenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1004, p. 245, 



Digitized by 



Google 



270 



The Immigration O>mmission. 



t 



8 



1 



1 

8 



•S 



§ 



=1 






H 



8 






1 



53 
Xi 



I 






I 



i 

o 



5^1 






III 



Hi 



o 3 • 






It 



& 

•^ 






tH©»OC0i-t 



00 CO 00^ 



r o » I'. ^ 
'3« 



-no WC^ 



t-ecoot-i 









<0 CD flk OO 



-i*-4ioeo 



oooeo 
odo6 



ooo-^oo o 

to cS '^ o 






tociMo e 

•^SS-^c 8 



•^S^-^tr 8 



"'S^'^c 8 



•0*00 









oocooo 



toMroeot« 















si 

o 



e 

ass 



e »— ii i 

I sssll I 

a -2S8S p 



ii 






f 



1 



f 
I 
i 



1| 
el 

H 

sl 

In 

n£i3 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 271 

There are four classes of juvenile delinquents which are of special 
interest — the native-bom white (regardless of parentage), the native 
white of native parentage, the native white of loreign parentage, and 
the foreign-bom. In each of these four classes the age group to 
which the greatest number belonged was that from 10 to 14 years. 
Of white juvenile delinquents of tms a^e the native-bom had a larger 
percentage than the foreign-bom, while in the native white group 
itself the largest proportion was that of delinquents who were bom 
of foreign parents. Of the delinquents committed between the a^es 
of 7 to 9 years the largest percentage was ako that of the native 
white of foreign parentage. As 6.4 per cent of the American-bom 
children of immigrants committed as ]uvenile delinquents were from 
7 to 9 years of age and 61 per cent from 10 to 14 years, over two- 
thirds, or 67.4 per cent, of all the white juvenile dehnquents bom in 
the United States of immigrant parents were below the age of 16. 

Delinquents of foreign birth, on the other hand, were relatively 
more numerous at ages above 14 years than were delinq[uents bom 
in this country. Of the total number of foreign-bom white juvenile 
delinquents, 43.9 per cent were 15 years of age or over, while of the 
native-bom only 37.5 per cent were as old. When the second gen- 
eration is considered, it is foimd that of the children of American 
parents 41.4 per cent were committed after reaching 15 years of age. 
while of the children of immigrant parents only 32.6 per cent had 
reached 15. 

Among the male juvenile delinquents the largest percentage were 
from 10 to 14 years of age, while among the females the largest per- 
centage (except of the colored) were from 15 to 19 years of age. Of 
males of known parentage the native-bom of native parentage had 
the greatest proportion (68.8 per cent) under 15 years old and the 
foreign-born had the least (57.2 per cent). The largest percentage of 
male juvenile delinquents 15 years or over was roimd among the 
foreign-born, being 42.8 per cent, while the smallest was that of the 
native-bom of foreign parentage, or 31.2 per cent. 

White female juvenile delinquents were not numerous, and their 
scarcity among the foreign-bom renders a proper comparison of im- 
migrants and natives impossible. As there were less than 100 of 
each age among the foreign-bom no percentages are shown for the 
immigrants. 

LITEBACT. 

In dealing with the census statistics of literacy among juvenile 
delinquents the same difficulty is encoimtered as in dealing with the 
census statistics of literacy among prisoners. The presence of vary- 
ing proportions of cases in which fiteracy was not stated renders com- 
parison of the different nativity and parentage groups of delinquents 
mconclusive. In the table next submitted, which shows the per cent 
distribution bv literacy of juvenile delincjuents 10 years of age and 
over, the number not stating Uteracy varies from 0.9 per cent of the 
foreign-born delinquents to 3.3 per cent of the native-Dom of foreign 
parentage. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



272 



The Immigration Commission. 



I 

i 

8 
8* 



I 

I 
.I" 



It 



^ 



hi 

e2 



I 



I 
I 



I 



I 



I 



i 



u 



II 



la*- 



m 



I 









e*H«oioak 



8 






^fOri^ei 



6mi^ec6 



Sritiei 



SoS 












oot^coo o 



Sa^a-^ 8 






et-coeoeo o 






26fld>H«oc4 ^ 









SS-^**** 8 






ceicc«eQt-4 



teeo^OkM 






8 

I 
I 

s 

I 

I 



•oakc«t«<o 



8 
1 



cer«ooo» 



«oMt»«e« 



3 












as*- 



s 

si 

.111 

o 

n 



5 



•.s 

si 

Hi 

S3 5 



:5 



i 
is 

I 



9 
P 

9 



Digitized by 



Google 



Immigration and Crime. 278 

Of the foreign-bom, 17.6 per cent were unable either to read or 
write, while only 7.4 per cent of the native-bom belonged in this 
category. Of the two well-defined groups of the native-bom, the one 
of native parentage exceeded the one of foreign parentage in per- 
centage of juvenile delinquents who could not read or write. A sep- 
aration of the sexes shows complete illiteracy to have been greater 
among the immigrant males than among the native males and 
greater among the males bom in America of native parents than 
among those born of immigrant parents. On the other nand, female 
delinauents bom in America of native parents had relatively fewer 
complete illiterates amon^ them than those bom of immigrant 
parents. A comparison of female immigrants and natives is not pos- 
sible because of the absence of any percentages for females of foreign 
birth. 

An additional word of qualification should be made regarding these 
literacy figures. They show the children of Americans to have been 
more illiterate than the children of immigrants. This mi^ht be mis- 
leading were it not for the fact that ^^the same general difference in 
favor of the native white children of forei^ parentage is to be found 
diso in the total population and 'results chiefly from the concentration 
of the foreign-bom in cities, where the schools are better than in the 
country ' "** and where compulsory attendance is more strictly enforced. 
If there is any relation between hteracy and juvenile delinquency, it 
is not revealed by these statistics. 

LANGUAGE SPOKEN. 

The census statistics of laimiage spoken by juvenile delinquents 
are, like those of hteracy, of httle value in a study of immigrant, crime. 
Language must bear so slight a relation to crimmality that the value 
of cominete data on lan^age spoken would be doubtful. The value 
of incomplete data, sucn as tnat presented in the table next sub- 
mitted, is more doubtful still. 

• Priaoners andJuyenile Delinquents in Institutions: 1904, p. 247. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



274 



The Iininigrati<Hi Commission. 



g 




1 


s 


-§ 


b« 


1 


1 


§ 


1 


k. 


Q 


5 


3 


8 


5 


^ 


§ 






Is 

8| 

II 



3 






5 
^ 



I 



I* 






fig 



li 



III 



3|l 



III 



1 



I 



I 



ll 









c*eo»o 












« 8 









oeo«o 



8 '** s- 









S '-* 8 



OOM 



8 ' 






1 1 i HI I 



CQiOCO O 



00 00-^ 

gJMd 






-^ 8 



^ '«* 8 



& '^* 8 



t ci 



m 



s > 



3^ 
i- 

a 



ijl 11 III li lit li III 11 

wosz; fl^ 5^ fi< i^ 






Digitized by 



Google 



Inunigration and Crime. 



275 






o I ecctto 

8 |8 * ■ 



s * * 



s ■ ■ 



^ ■ • 



•if ii iif 



|l 

Is 



9^ 
§53 






Digitized by 



Google 



276 The Immigration G>mmission. 

In view of the inequalities in the proportion of cases in which the 
language spoken was **not specified, tne least questionable manner 
of using the figures is to compare the percentage of cases in 
which it was known that English was not spoken. These cases are 
shown imder the desi^ation ^ 'other'' language. In the continental 
United States as a whole approximately 1 in every 40 white immi- 
grant delinquents committed during 1904 was imable to speak English, 
while only 1 in every 200 of the native-bom was ignorant of the English 
language. In the North Central States the proportion of immi^ants 
who spoke only a foreign language was somewhat greater than m the 
coimtry at large, being 1 in every 27. The proportion of the native- 
bom, however, is the same in this group of States as in the country at 
large. 

A comparison of the children of natives with the children of immi- 
grants might be of interest, but insufficient data are sdiown for making 
such a comparison except for the United States as a whole and in the 
North Atlantic States. In the country at large less than one-tenth 
of 1 per cent of the native white delinquents of native parentage 
were imable to speak English, while three-tenths of 1 per cent of the 
native-bom of foreim parentage were ignorant of the language. In 
the North Atlantic States the percentage of the former was 0.1 per 
cent and of the latter 0.2 per cent. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Chapter XIH. 
ESTBT [OF FOBEIGir CBIMnTALS DTTO THE XJSITED STATES. 

In addition to the foregoing statistical study of immigrant crim- 
inality in the United States, an investigation was made of the entry 
into this coimtry of immi^ants having criminal records abroad. The 
primary objects of this mvestigation were to discover (1) whether 
any considerable number of persons convicted abroad of crimes 
involving moral turpitude haa succeeded in entering the United 
States in violation of the immigration law, (2) whether it was pos- 
sible to trace such persons if here and obtain conclusive evidence of 
their foreign criminal records, and (3) what improvements might be 
made in that portion of the immi^ation law which is designed to 
protect the country from such immigrants. 

In order to simplify the work, investigation was confined to immi- 
grants from a single coimtry. Italy was selected as that country for 
two reasons: (1) Because of the popular opinion, voiced in the press, 
that large numbers of Italians having criminal records in Italy come 
to the United States, and that Italian crimes of violence in this 
coimtry are in large measure due to them, and (2) because of the 
^eat assistance that the New York poUce department could render 
m tracing Italian criminals id New York City. 

The city of New York and its immediate neighborhood were 
chosen as the scene of the investigation. This was because of the 
large proportion of the ItaUan population of the country gathered 
there, the less likelihood of excitmg suspicion id conducting such an 
iDvestigation in a large city, and the assistance of the New York 
police department in carrying on the work. 

To conduct this investigation confidential agents were necessary — 
persons who were familiar with the Italians and who could go among 
them without exciting suspicion. 

In order both to test the accuracy of the work of the agents of the 
Commission and to obtain evidence upon which deportation might be 
secured, requests were sent to Italian courts for copies of the penal 
records of a number of the persons reported upon by the Commission's 
agents. 

After a considerable number of cases had been investigated and 
enough ItaUan penal certificates had been secured to establish the 
accuracy of the work done and the desperate nature of many of the 
criminals, as well as to test the efficiency of the present immigration 
law, the Commission considered its work performed. Whenever the 
evidence obtained was clear, it was turned over to the New York 
police department or to the Bureau of Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion for further action. 

More than 500 cases were investigated in New York, some 70 penal 
certificates were secured from Italy, and as a result of information 
furnished by the Commission a number of Italian criminals were 
deported. 

277 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



278 The Immigration Commission. 

Cooperating with the Immigration Commission, the police depart- 
ment of the city of New York made special investigations. The 
Inimigratinii Commission was also aided oy the Bureau of Immigra- 
tion and Naturalization, which furnished copies of Italian penal certifi- 
cates and records of deportation cases. From these sources, in 
addition to the reports of the Commission's agents and the penal 
certificates obtained from abroad regarding men reported on by 
them, were gathered the data upon which tms chapter is based. 

This special investigation has made it clear that the ranks of Italian 
criminals in this country are largely recruited from members of the 
same class in Italy.^ It has shown that persons convicted abroad of 
crimes '* involving moral turpitude" do enter the United States in 
violation of the statute of exclusion. But it has also brought out 
the fact that even imder ideal conditions it would be impossible, 
without changing the existing law, to keej) out of the country persons 
living on the borders of crime, but unconvicted of any specific offense; 
immigrants against whom the law is impotent and yet who are 
evidently higmy undesirable. It has also been made clear that too 
great barriers are placed in the way of deporting foreign criminals 
when once they are discovered. Furthermore, identification of 
immigrant criminals is extremely difficult. 

At least foiu" classes of Italians who are highly imdesirable because 
of their criminal propensities succeed in entering the United States: 

1. Those who nave been convicted of crime in Italy and have 
served out their sentences. 

2. Those who have been convicted of crime by Italian courjbs dur- 
ing their absence from the place of trial, having escaped arrest and 
fled the coimtry. 

3. Those who have been tried in Italy for criminal offenses, but 
have not been convicted, although the probability of guilt appears 
great. 

4. Those who are regarded at home as dangerous or suspicious 
persons and are therefore kept imder observation by the police, 
although accused of no specific offense. 

Evidently the present inmiigration law provides for the exclusion 
of only the first of these four classes — the criminal convicted by a 
foreign court, before his arrival in the United States, of a crune 
*' involving moral tiurpitude." The person adjudged guilty by a 
foreign court after his arrival in this country (even though ne may 
have fled the country because of the charge) is not regarded in the 
United States as coming within the meaning of the statute of exclu- 
sion, and is therefore not liable to deportation; while he who has 
escaped conviction, and he who is accused of no crime, no matter 
how unsavory their reputations may be at home, are clearly beyond 
the power of the immigration law to debar from entering. 

Further than this, however, the present law is powerless against 
immigrants convicted in foreign courts, under procedure satisfactory 
to American law, of crimes ''mvolving moral turpitude," who have 
been resident in the United States three years or more. Thus, no 
matter how clear the evidence of the unlawful entry of an immigrant, if 
he be not brought before the board of special inquiry of the Bureau of 
Immigration and Naturalization within three years after the time of 
his arrival in the country, the foreign convict can not be deported. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 279 

From the cases inyestigated by the agents of the Commission, and 
those furnished by the Bureau of Inunigration and the police depart- 
ment of New York, illustration may be made of the four classes of 
undesirable Italian immigrants of criminal nature. 

I. That inunigrants do enter the United States in violation of the 
section of the immigration law forbidding the entrance of convicted 
criminals is beyond doubt. The records of the Bureau of Immigra- 
tion and Naturalization contain many cases of this nature; in some 
of them deportation proceedings have rid the country of such per- 
sons; in otherS; because of the wree-vear limit, it has been impossible 
to deport men whose criminid recordis abroad were indisputable. 

The case of Alfredo Simonelli was reported by the police commissioner 
of New York City to the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization. 
A penal certificate obtained from the Italian Government showed 
that Simonelli had been six times convicted and sentenced in Italy — 
once for murder, twice for assault, once for threatening with weapons, 
once for violation of the raikoad law, and once for defamation — a 
total of seven and one-half years' imprisonment and 350 lire in fines. 
Apprehended before he had been three years in the United States, he 
was deported on the steamship Bretagne, January 14, 1909. 

Three of the cases investigated by agents of the Commission and 
then turned over to the ponce department of New York Citjr for 
further action^ were those of Salvatore d'Amico, Gaetano Luizzo, 
and Santo Luizzo. 

Regarding Salvatore d'Amico, the agent of the Commission re- 
ported that he had been arrested for murder and convicted of man- 
slaughter and sentenced to five or six years imprisonment, and that 
after his release he had got into some trouble with the pohce and was 
arrested and sentenced for resisting an officer. The penal certifi- 
cate obtained from the Italian court showed a sentence of five years 
for manslaughter, a sentence of twenty-nine days for threatening 
and resisting the pubUc pohce, and a sentence of twenty-nine days for 
assault. 

The agent of the Commission reported of Gaetano Luizzo: 

Gaetano Luizzo, of 85 James Street, Borough of Manhattan, in the city of New York, 
is from Valquanera. Here he belongs to the Mafia and Camorra. Was convicted in 
Italy on Hie charee of stabbing and again on the charge of robbery, and put under 
the police surveilmnce, and while under thepublic surveillance escajyed and came to 
the United States by the way of France. He was tried in the corte tribunale penale. 
He has been here about two years and three or four months. 

The Italian penal certificate showed that he had been five times 
convicted and sentenced — twice for assault, once for stabbing and 
cutting, once for pointing and trying to shoot with firearms, and once 
for having used arms, and for shooting and assault — each crime 
having been some manner of assault. 

The case of Santo Luizzo was reported by the Commission's agent 
as follows: 

Santo Luizzo, of 85 James Street, Borough of Manhattan, city of New York, is from 
Vfdquanera; was convicted in the City of Oatanisetta, Sicily, three times, once for 
staboinff, once for robbery, and once for carrying concealed weapon. On the first 
chfloge he was tried in the corte tribunale penale. 

In the ItaUan penal certificate were recorded three convictions — 
one month to sohtary confinement for stabbing and assault, three 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



280 The Immigration G>iimii9sioii. 

months for assault, threatening; and carrying concealed weapons, and 
fif tv^-fiye days for assault and attempting to use arms. 

These cases illustrate the possibiUty of tracing and identifying 
immigrant criminals who have obtained entry into the United States. 

These are not unusual cases; they are merely a few of those investi- 
gated. The number of convictions against many of the Italian 
criminals brought before the immigration authorities for deportation 
is the most striking thing in these cases, as well as most significant of 
their danger to the country, for it indicates a habit of criminaUty 
most likely to be continued arter their entrance into the United States. 

The case of Giovanni Campanile is one of those where a loi^ 
criminal record appears. Briow is given a cop^ of the report of the 
Itahan consul-general at New Yore upon which deportation pro- 
ceedings were based: 

TRIBUNAL OF NAPOLI, PXNAL CBRTIFICATB. 

The district attorney of Napoli, haviiig been duly requested by the police commis- 
sioner of Napoli, states that Giovanni Campanile, son of Genaro and Maria Stella 
Mantanini, bom at Napoli, reported the following sentences: 

1. By the tribunal of Salerno on August 3, 1898, f<Hty-five days' imprisonment for 
robbery. 

2. By the tribunal of Napoli on October 17, 1898, one month of imprisonment and 
120 fine for insulting a public officer. 

3. By the tribimal ol Napoli on November 19, 1898, one month and three days' 
imprisonment and |12 fine for threatening. 

4. Bv the pretore of Napoli on November 30, 1898, sixteen days in jail for carrying 
concealed weapons. 

5. By the tribunal of Napoli on October 7, 1899, sixteen months' imprisonment for 
criminal assault. 

6. By the court of assize on February 9, 1901, eight years' impriscmment for murder 
in the second degree. 

7. By the tribunal of Napoli on August 26, 1902, fifteen months' imprisonment for 
criminal assault (the term was on appeal reduced to seven months and fifteen da^). 

8. By the tribimal of Napoli on March 12, 1905, two months and fifteen days' im- 
prisonment and $20 fine for insulting a public officer. 

9. By the pretore of A versa on September 13, 1904, two months' imprisonment for 
insulting a public officer. 

10. B^r the pretore of Aversa on September 13| 1904, forty-one dajrs' imprisonment 
for felonious assault. 

D. St0a, 
Diitrict AUome^. 
' D. Giuu, 

Chief Clerk, 
Mabsiolia, 
licdian Consul-General, 
New York, Ifordi It, 1908. 

The board of special inquiry of the Bureau of Immigration and 
NaturaUzation, satisfied that the aUen had been convicted of crimes 
prior to landing, recommended deportation; and Giovanni Campanile 
was deported on the steamship iSi. Paul August 8, 1908. 

11. Under ItaUan criminal procedure, cases may be tried, convic- 
tion secured, and sentence imposed during the absence of the accused. 
According to American rulings, however, a person tried and con- 
victed abroad after his arrival in the United States is not regarded 
as guilty within the meaning of 'the immigration law, even mough 
he fled to the United States because of the accusation. 

A case brought up for deportation in the early part of 1908 illus- 
trates this type and shows the inadequacy of the law and its inter- 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 281 

pretation to meet the evident need of some means of excluding such 
mmiigrants. 

A complaint was made to the police commissioner of New York 
Oity by the Italian consul, stating that a murder had been committed 
in Italy by the person named, on the 27th of August, 1905; that said 
person had been sentenced on November 20, 1906, to twenty-one 
years' imprisonment; that said convict had escaped to America, 
where he presumably arrived about January, 1907. 

Investigation showed that a proper penal certificate from the 
Italian Government confirmed the charge of murder and the sentence. 

A careful investigation by the Bureau of Immigration brought out 
the fact, however, that, although the alien in question was in all 
probability the person referred to in the penal certificate, his con- 
viction was obtained during his absence from Italy, and that pre- 
sumably at the date of his arrival in the United States he had not 
been convicted of any crime ''involving moral turpitude." 

It appeared, therefore, that the alien in question was not in this 
country in violation of the immigration laws, and consequently could 
not be deported upon such charge, although it was evident that he 
was indeed a crimmal whom it was undesirable to retain.** 

III. Persons charged with crime in foreign countries, but untried, 
evidently do not come under the present exclusion clause of the immi- 
gration law. They have not been convicted of crime, and unless 
they admit guilt it is impossible to debar or deport them. The 
following case is significant because of the gravity of the accusation, 
and although deportation was eflfected, it was not because of the 
criminal charge of the Italian court. 

In March, 1908, an Italian named P C was arrested in 

New York. The poUce had information that this man was under 
indictment for murder in Italy. The ItaUan consul was communi- 
cated with and stated that he had in his possession a certificate of 
the Italian Government requesting the arrest of said person for the 
crime of ''premeditated murder, committed with a club.'' The crime 
was committed in the fall of 1906 and the Italian warrant for his 
arrest was dated November 14, 1906. 

The accused had succeeded in evading arrest and had reached the 
United States probably in December, 1906. His answers before the 
board of special inquiry were very evasive and unsatisfactory. No 
satisfactory information could be secured from him relative to the 
time of his arrival, nor as to the vessel or steamship line on which he 
had come. There seemed to be no doubt that this man was the one 
specified in the ItaUan warrant. He denied that he was guilty of 
tne murder charged, but at the time of his last examination admitted 
that he had fled from Italy because of his impending arrest. He could 
not be deported, however, upon the charge of being in the United 
States in violation of law, in that he had not been* convicted of, nor had 
he admitted having committed, a felony or other crime or misdemeanor 
involving moral turpitude, prior to coming to the United States. 
He was mially deported, however, on the charge of '* being in the United 

o It was, however, possible iinder the circumstances for the Italian Government to 
secure his arrest and return to Italy under extradition proceedings, but in no other 
way could he be sent out of the United States. 

79340**— VOL 36—11 19 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



282 The Immigration Commission. 

States unlawfully/' in that he had landed at a tune or place other than 
that designated oy the immigration officers. 

The shortcomings of the law are noticeable in this case, for if it 
had been possible to show a landing after inspection by the immigra- 
tion authorities this undesirable ahen could not have been deported. 

IV. Against another class of immigrants as dangerous to society 
as convicted criminals the present law is powerless. These are men 
who, although convicted ot no crime, are regarded at home as dan- 
gerous or suspicious characters and are kept under observation by 
the police. It is now impossible to debar them from entering the 
United States, although it is frequently clear that they are as unde- 
sirable as the convicted criminal. Sometimes they have been tried 
abroad for a criminal charge, but have escaped conviction; at other 
times they are merely men of evil associations, who are suspected of 
criminal activities but against whom no evidence can be obtained. 
In either case the likelihood of their becoming members of the criminal 
class in this country is great enough to warrant some provision for 
their exclusion. 

The cases of Galante Di Dio Cologero, Guiseppe Fontana, and 
Archangelo Guanero are typical of this class. 

Regarding Galante Di Dio Cologero, the certificate of the Italian 
court stated that ''although the records do not show any conviction, 
he 13 held and looked upon by all in his village as a mafioso,<» and his 
reputation is bad.'' 

The ItaUan certificate regarding Archangelo Guanero was of like 
tenor. Although no conviction of crime appeared against him, he 
was ''looked upon by all in his village as a mafioso" and was **of evil 
reputation.'' 

The case of Guiseppe Fontana, however, while likewise showing no 
convictions, gives evidence of a much greater criminal activity. 
Fontana's "Biographical card" and a letter from poUce headquarters 
in Palermo are as follows: 

Biographical card of Guiseppe Fontana. 
(Translation.] 

Charge. 

Accused of the murder of one Francesco Cavallaro. and also of committing highway 
robbery upon him, being also charged with having formed a criminal assoclatioii. 
Rele.ised A.pr. 11, 1873, for lack of evidence. 

.\rrested for highway robbery and attempted kidnaping of one Cesare Todare. Re- 
leased Aug. 3, 1881, for lack of evidence. 

Arrested for bighwav robbery and assault committed on one Deluca. Released July 
11, 1885, for lack of evidence. 

Arrested on the charge of being a party to a criminal association. Released May 12, 
1894, for lack of evidence. 

Arrested for counterfeiting. Released June 7, 1896, for lack of evidence. 

Arretted fof being suspected of killing one Emanuel Notarbartolo. Released Jan. 14, 
1899. Arrested again July 24» 1904, on the same charge. Released for lack of evi- 
dence. 

Note.— Under special police surveillance from March 7, 1878, to May 6, 1880. 




• A " mafioso," as the term is used here, is a " tough "—one having an habitual disregard for the law. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 283 

LETTER FROM THE QUESTOR OF PALERMO. 

[Translation.) 
(Object: Pontana, Qulseppe, son ol Vlcenzo and Marzerbo, Anna, born Oct. 14, 1852, in Vlllabote.) 

Palermo, March 18, 1907, 
Guiseppe Fontana is a dangerous criminal, a most suspicious character, and one 
capable of organizing and directing any criminal enterprise, having been affiliated 
here with the Mafia, not only of this district and province, but elsewhere. 

Although the penal certificate issued by the president of the local tribunal shows 
only a single charge against him, and even that not sufficiently supported to convict 
hiin, yet from the records of this office, of which the accompanying biographical card 
is a copy, it appears that many and grave are the offenses alleged to have been com- 
mitted by him, but of which the proofs were always lacking. From which it will 
readily be seen that this Fontana has shown himself to be a criminal, and there is 
little doubt that he may have been concerned in certain homicides that have occurred 
in New York. 

The Questor, F». Sangtorqi. 
The honorable, the Prefect, Palermo. 

In reporting on this case, the then police commissioner of New 
York, Gren. Theodore A. Bingham, said that he beUeved the evidence 
of criminality strong enough to warrant deportation. The lack of 
any conviction of crime abroad, however, makes it impossible to 
apply the deportation clause of the immigration law in such cases, 
and unless some revision of the law be made, men of the stamp of 
Guiseppe Fontana must be permitted to enter, and remain in, the 
United States. 

The greatest shortcoming, however, of the present immigration 
law lies in the fact, not that it is powerless against any but the one 
class of criminals who have been actually convicted prior to their 
arrival in the United States, but that it is ineffective against many 
of this very class it was designed to deal with. This is the result of 

?)lacing a three-year limit upon the time within which an alien unlaw- 
ully in the country may be deported. If discovery and conclusive 
proof of the conviction of an immigrant be not made within three 
years of the date of his arrival, it becomes impossible to secure his 
deportation. Even though evidence of his foreign conviction be 
obtained within the three years, if the man himself be not appre- 
hended and brought before the board of special inquiry before the 
three years have expired, nothing can be done unless the action 
resulting in his apprenension was instituted by the Bureau of Immi- 
gration and Naturalization less than three years after his arrival; 
such action begun by other authorities could not be considered as 
falling within the rule. 

The case of Vincenzo Abbadessa stands as an example of the inade- 
quacy of the three-year limit. The translation of his penal certificate 
reads as follows: 

Tribunal op Reogio Calabria, Italy, 

March /, 1907. 
This certifies that Vincenzo Abbadessa, son of Pasquale and Cosoleto Mariangela, 
bom November 17, 1855, has been sentenced as follows: 
December 5, 1868, 6 days in prison for assault. 

August 16, 1870, 1 month, and 6 months under special police surveillance for robbery. 
November 5. 1870, 4 months for robbery. 

November 18, 1871, 3 months in prison, 6 months under special police surveillance. 
September 18, 1875, 1 year for robbery. 
June 5, 1876, 4 months* for blackmail. 
September 20, 1876, 6 months in prison for assault. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



284 The Immigration Commission. 

December 16, 1878, 7 months for robbery. 
December 31, 1883, 4 iponths for disorderly conduct. 
June 19, 1884, 2 months for assault. 
October 22, 1885, 2 months for disorderly conduct. 
April 17, 1886, 3 months for robbery. 
October 11, 1886, 4 months for violating his parole. 

October 3, 1889, 8 months for robbery and a fine of 100 francs and 3 years under 
special police surveillance. 
September 29, 1893, at Tunis, 8 months for robbery. 
March 17, 1897, 40 days for violating his parole. 
June 25, 1897, 25 days under special police surveillance. 
Aug[U6t 25, 1897, 5 months for resisting the royal police. 
April 25, 1898, arrested for robbery; not proven. 
July 4, 1898, 4 months and 20 days for assault. 

August 17, 1898, 4 months and 15 days for assault and violating his parole. 
March 6, 1899, 1 month for violating his parole. 
August 26, 1899, 2 months for violating his parole. 
September 7, 1900, 60 days for violating his parole. 
February 9, 1901, charge of robbery; not proven. 
September 17, 1904, 3 mon4Ji8 and 15 days for violating his parole. 
Peoniary 27, 1905, 40 days for violating his parole. 

(Signed) The Pbbpect of Pouce. 

On May 29, 1905, 61 dajrs after the expiration of his last Italian 
sentence, this man arrived in the United States. On December 21, 
1906, he was arrested in New York on a criminal charge, and on March 
18, 1907, was sentenced to two and a half years' miprisonment in 
Sing Sing. 

Abbadessa's penal certificate was not secured from Italy, and the 
police department of New York consequently was not in a position 
to take steps toward liis deportation until tfuly 20, 1908. At that 
time he had been in the United States about two months more than 
three years, and although he had been convicted of crime and sen- 
tenced, to Sing Sing prison before he had been three years in this 
country he could not oe deported.** 

Thus a man with a long criminal record, who had already received 
a criminal sentence in the United States, was permitted to remain in 
the country merely because his incarceration m an American prison 
made it impossible to bring deportation proceedings against him until 
his release. Yet others, with no evidence of criminal conduct since 
their arrival in the United States, are promptly deported because of 
petty crimes abroad. 

The cases of Salvatore Messina and Salvatore Schif ani illustrate the 
slight offenses which are sometimes sufiicient to secure deportation. 
Salvatore Messina was sentenced by the justice of Novarra on January 
29, 1896, to 15 days in jail for larceny. Two years later, on January 
15, 1898, the justice of Barcellona sentenced him to 3 days in jail 
for a very petit larceny. Seven and a half years after this, on J^ly 1, 
1905, Salvatore Messina arrived in the United States. On May 14, 
1908, he was deported on the steamship Hamburg because of these two 
slight offenses, the last of which was committed over 10 years before. 
For 10 years, so far as the Italian criminal records show^, Salvatore 
Messina had lived a law-abiding hfe. Yet because of 18 days spent 
in Italian jails it was necessary to deport him, while Vencenzo Abba- 
dessa, with a long career of crime benind him, must be permitted to 

o This case is also cited by Deputy Police Commissioner Arthur Woods, of New 
York, in an article on "The Problem of the Black Hand," in McClure's Magazine 
lor May, 1909. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



Immigration and Crime. 285 

remain in the United States. The ruling of the Secretary of Com- 
merce and Labor in Messina's case was, that although his offenses 
were probably considered slight, since the sentence was mild, ** theft 
involves moral turpitude'' and the subject therefore came within the 
scope of the law. 

The case of Salvatore Schifani is a similar one. His p>enal certifi- 
cate shows but one conviction (which was for incendiarism), with a 
sentence of one month of detention and a fine of 100 lire, reduced by 
the tribunal of Palermo to 15 days' detention and a fine of 50 lire 
flialf the original sentence). Yet Salvatore Schifani was deported on 
the Liguria January 2, 1909. 

Not only do immigrant criminals enter the United States through 
the re^lar channels of immigration, passing the inspection at ports of 
entry m company with other immigrants, but some of them come as 
seamen on foreign vessels, while others land at Canadian ports and 
make their way across the border. 

The two following cases are examples of the employment of these 
means of entering the country: 

The report of a confidential agent on "C P " says: 

He committed a crime in Sicily; escaped to Tunis; from there shipped as a sailor 
on board a vessel bound for New York. His criminal record at home shows that he 
served a term for murder, and was also put under police surveillance. 

The report of a confidential agent on says: 

Camehere from Palermo, Italv, some three yearsago. Was pon vie ted while in Italy of 
robbery when he was 19 years old. He served 2 years. Was later arrested with oUiers 
for the murder of an Italian farmer. He was again convicted and sentenced to a term 
of 9 years. After serving 4 vears he escaped to France. He was smuggled on board 
a steamer for Montreal, lanaed there, and thence made his way to New York. Haa 
been here 5 months; has been arrested for passing coimterfeit money, imder an 
assumed name (unknown to us), but escaped punishment. Was implicated in the 

shooting of , in New York City, but all were afraid to testify M^ainst him. 

He executed the orders of the leader of the gang to which he belongs. He does not 
work, and has never been employed since he came. There is, or was at the time he 
escaped from prison, a reward offered for his arrest. 

These are conditions difficult to deal with. Especially is the entry 
of foreign criminals jb^s alien seamen a matter requiring serious con- 
sideration. A special report on ali^n seamen has been prepared by 
the Immigration Commission and may be referred to for further 
discussion of this matter.* 

The InMnigration Commission investigated only some five hundred 
cases. The question still remains unanswered, How many of these 
ItaUan criminals are in the country? No one can tell, but it is 
likely that the number is greater than is popularly supposed. Gen- 
Theodore A. Bingham says: 

It is estimated that there are at least 3,000 of these desperadoes [criminals from 
Southern Italy; perhaps not all of them with penal records abroad, however] in New 
York, amon^ them as many ferocious and desperate men as ever gathered in a modern 
city in the time of peace — medieval criminals who must be dealt with imder modem 
laws, ft 

a Alien seamen and stowaways. See vol. 2 of Reports of the Immigration Com- 
mission. (S. Doc. No. 747, Cist cong., 3d sess.) 

ft Foreign Criminals in New York, by Theodore A. Bingham. North Americas 
Review, vol. 188, p. 392. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



286 The Immigration Commission. 

It appears from the Italian penal records and from the criminal 
statistics of the United States that ItaUan crimes in this country are 
very like those in Italy — crimes of extortion and blackmail, of personal 
violence, and private vengeance. But at times they appear to assume 
more violent and destructive forms here than abroad. In some sec- 
tions of the United States, and especially in New York City, they have 
excited considerable alarm. In 1908 General . Bingham, then police 
commissioner of Xew York, wrote that — 

In New York . . . crimes of blackmailing, blowine up shops and houses, and 
kidnaping of their fellow-countrymen, have become prevsJent among Italian residents 
of the city to an extent that can not much longer be tolerated.^ 

Thus far the crimes of Italians have been mainly directed against 
their own countrymen, who, knowing the character of the criminals 
and the swiftness of their vengeance, have hesitated to make com- 
plaint. According to the reports of the New York poUce department, 
and from the investigations of the Commission, this terrorism appears 
most natural. The victims almost universally refuse to give any sort 
of assistance in bringing Italian criminals to justice, fearmg above all 
things their vengeance. The men who have been boldest m securing 
evidence for the Commission, and whose reports have been most care- 
fully checked up by securing penal certificates from Italy and other 
evidence sufficient to procure the deportation of criminals, have posi- 
tively refused to appear in any way against the objects of their 
investigation or to let it be known that they were in any way con- 
nected with the work. They have asserted that if it were known that 
they had been making such mvestigations their Uves would be in con- 
stant jeopardy. 

The great majority of the Italians in this country are law-abiding 
and industrious; that they should be the prey of that small proportion 
of criminals who pass with them through tne American ports of entry is 
a grave reflection upon the efficiency of our immigration laws. Not 
only do ItaUan criminals enter the Unit-ed States, but also criminals 
from other countries. It appears probable, however, that the Italian 
criminals are largest in numbers and create most alarm by the violent 
character of their offenses in this country. 

It is clear that regulations should be made t>o check this entrance 
of criminals and better to provide for the deportation of those who 
succeed in entering. 

o Foreign Criminals in New York, by Theodore A. Bingham. North American 
Review, vol. 188, p. 386. 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



GENERAL TABLES. 



NEW YOBK CITY XA6ISTBATES' COUBTS: TABLES 1-10. 
NEW YOBK CHILDBEN'S COIJBTS: TABLES 11 AND 12. 
NEW YOBK COTTBT OF 6ENEBAL SESSIONS: TABLES 18-88. 
NEW YOBK COUNTY AND 8X7PBEXE COTTBTS: TABLES 88-60. 
CHICAGO POLICE ABBESTS: TABLES 61 AND 68. 
ELASSACHIJSETTS PENAL INSTITIJTIONS : TABLES 68-69. 
ALIEN PBISONEBS IN THE UNITED STATES: TABLES 70-84. 



287 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



288 



The Immigration Commission. 



m 



is 



H 

Hi 



if 






3 

o 



;J^£ 



Is 



O 



3 ^^ 



eo^eogo 






-g^iS 



""SJ^gS 



^1^15 



Sg^Si 



-S-28 



agi2§g 



'^^^sa 



^Sa|9 



8S3g2 



iiSii 



gi. 



\%^\ 



sggis 



-859'- 



$a5|s 



Si§§§ 



iaSS 



'II 






-asss*^ 



'|sas9 









SS2Sf285 









iisgis* 






SiiSisS 



s*-' 



§SSi§iS 



88^ 



*-* ct «r Ct A A "< 
ViO ©«« CQ eo -^ 



§|3§§§§ 



§l§§gS9 






I 



38 



99 



Si* 






II 






•5 ^ 






l3 



O 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



289 



§§s§ 


§ 


g 


§s 


i 


n ^ 


>o 


^ 


^"m^ 


n 








r:- 


^g-oo 


s 


s 


s^ 


s 








eo 


ti 


iS-i 


i 


s 


Eg 


5 


cT 


ci 


c4' 


g^- 


1 


S5SSS 


§ 


§ 


si 


i 
s 


• Ok^OO 


s 


9 


1? 


§ 








« 


«- 


S|SS 


s 

10 


eo 












le 


•0 


H^U 


S 


^ 


§1 


3 


sjs'-g! 


§ 


sill 


i 






s 


s- 










SR53 


§ 


^ 


Si 
3 




"1"* 


S 


a 


00 


§ 

CO 


-5"a 


s 


K 


n 


§ 


SS-s 


§ 


i 


\n 


S 


" 


w 


" 


r 


g 






lilfl 3 i il I 

illli '^''' 



I i 



Digitized by 



Google 



290 



The Immigration Commission. 



O 3 

I s 



I 

a 



Is 






I 



1 

o 






3 



•6 
I 



i 






pes 



O 



i§SS 



SSt:| 



8SS3 



Sie$!S 






SS*"? 



5:K;:5 



.g«o 



^ooukW/ 









§|2|g|5 



r« e N 25 <o CI C5 



oocg^-^jpeocr 






1-4 •-« ^ lO c« to «o 



X 



Ss^ggs* 



ooci oo«oco 



Silgis^ 



•QO^rH cocoes 






Vic'csTeoeoco'^ 



§i^§§§§ 



§l§§i«S§ 



o6 « CO >c o) o o> 



^h>So6!oSn 






§111 



•-« g C O f- 2 '-• 



«2Si=35§ 



Si§§P^S 



'©ss'sasss 



2SaS 



anginas 



*S8SS"S« 



"issaasjs 









^S^3 



=15 



15223 



2 SSI: 



t=§s= 



1 



xi 



IP 



II 



^ 



ll 



pOiSc 



5.B 



i y liiii 

O o ^ - - e 

3 " 



llliri! 



t3 

o 



o 



Digitized by 



Google 



■TV 



!235 



eg 



?2S 



Iss 






s- 



§§ 



8 



«« 



i§ 



§« 






IS 



§S 



is 



pi 



11 I ll 1 



General Tables. 



291 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



292 



The Immigration Commission. 



I 






^•0 


h 


•^ c* 


o 


;i V 


"O 


■^ S? 


« 


1'=^ 


« 


•-Ji 


gl 


p^ **• 


I 


o K^ 


« 


!^ 


1 


s •« 


O 


■^ 45 





1 1 


1! 






f' 


1 


ii 




:§ 


g 



I 
•I 

a 



^^ 



CO 

n 

< 






^t 



II 



3 



9 

H 



3^ 



§ 



8W!*88 



28^5: 



'S'"'^ 



2oj^» 



i§§S§§§ 



a'*'*;^? 



^ CO OD «0 OQ to lO 



l§«§iS2 



||*5sigia^ 



!8««-®SS5 



JggSgl^S 



IggiS^sa 



§ii§ig§ 



|8«J3SS« 



srs--= 



i?si§^Si 



5 55»^5 



S52§SJ?S8 



*S555'-5J5 



t^lHCO 'C* 



SgJ5S«8S 



Igsssa 



5128-88 



*^55?8*^22 



S|gS5§6 



SSgfeg 



:«gs| 



»a«| 



is;5 



-fj-j 



I'-a 



iS'S 



»2g5| 



>>Mi 



9qI^ 



I 



i 



I 
I 
Id 






: a M 
■ 20 

ill 

ill 



^ III si 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



293 



s 


§ 

►^ 




s 


■ 


-i 




ji : 


§ 


ts 








s 


1 




• 




9 


^« 


g 


eo 


§ 




o 

s 

eo 


o 


1 


§ss 


1 


S 


^ 




a 


^ 


§ 


U3 


i 




S; 


s- 


§ 


to 


ft 


22 


00 


3 




i? 


i 

5 


j 


3 




i 

c 





Digitized by 



Google 



294 



The Immigration Commission. 



S 






1 


1 


« 


d 


$ 


tm 


& ^ 


5 




1 


2»>wr 




•«;3 


§ 


Ji 


8 


"^ ^ 


73 


'14 


i 


•ia 


S 


^^ 


o 3 


•§ 


^i 


2 


^^ 


.9 


e> . 


o 


S -5 


fl 


^ ^ 


^ 


c 8 


•o 


'I* 


2 

U3 


K. 


s 


a 




;§ 


fc. 


•c^ 




1 




1 








^ 



Is 



3 

o 



O^ 



I 

1 

CO 



I 



3 



i 



»9 



pco 



O 



2K-^S 



•r gt»>o» 






CO lO 00 O) t« »o t^ 



gg-^sss 



04W® cc«o 



g 00 S5 •« Qg aO r>- 



§Siii^^ 



o> -^ oj «o CO r- U3 
"* o CO c>< e>i •« — < 

t^ -^ (N CO •* i-l ^ 



RS*^:^'^^ 



§§2Sfc^8 



Q O "-^ a-^ >Q 00 00 

or to cs h- lO "* t>. 
»o -♦ -♦ »o ■♦ csi r^ 



«S8l^s2 



sa 



I 2§|S5$§S 



s *^ass'«ss 



ss- ."^ 



g^jC^h-O 



-235^32 



SSS-'SaS 



%^S8S82 



HMiO,-! .Mi-I 



»||itS)gS 



lilll ^ 



§ 3 

< 



— 5^8 



"-8 



c»^3.e»oo 



3*^S 



r5 



§2^ 



'S^:? 



OOOOI^.-* 






ll 

«* n 

Cm. 

II 



< 



<<OCQh». 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



295 



n 


1 




s 




- S : 


s 


s 




3 


?? 


00 




® 


a g- 


i 


•o 


CO 


i 


o 


- 


• 


s 




S 

V 


o 


i 


|?2 


00 


« 


o 


M** 


S 


t^ 


a 


i^ 


! 


g 


1 


5 


i 

5 








1 


1 


] 





Digitized by 



Google 



296 



The Immigration Commission. 



^ t: 






§1 






3 



s 



I 



I 



P 



o 



SB2J5 



^:8-2 



ss^s 






558-^ iSK'"*" 






r^ to d> V ^ 00 0> 

^ l4 t-4 1-4 0> 1-4 t-4 



^QOCia>aa| 



sSl^iS? 



SSSsSSS 



S'JSgQ wS 



*-• lO t« «4 Q ro Q 



S8r:;SSSSS3 



g|S^SS9S 






sisisi§ 



sggg^gs 



'gSSJ-'S*' 



g^- 



§8S29S 



-ggs 



-^ssssss 



r^i-^WM '♦^ 



MOC«t*»0 



QQMO 



''^S 



ssgss 



s ^^|^§ 



3 "s^'S 



-<rc«»Q^ 



s-s 



!>. »^ 



=2gSf 






s 



a 

SI 

If 

nil 
illi 



t 






:s 

• so •* 

ill 

III 



Digitized by 



Google 



Gaieral Tables. 



297 



s 



§S5 



S3 



il 



II 11 i 



(3 

o 



79340*'— VOL 36—11 20 



Digitized by 



Google 



298 



The Immigratioo G>ininission. 



I 



1 



f: 



^ 



*-l 



•Sa i 



1 



.•i ! 



1 ^ 
■g 



I 



5 



<§ 



S 



1| 



ll 

''I 



i 



1 



i 
1 



OS 






1^ 

pGQ 



%3 

o 



asj^g 



^rj^Q 



^il^'S 



SR'^S 






gg^'ag'*'' 









§§"822" 



ISRSggS 



§ii§s«§ 



SsRsiS^ 



§i§ii§« 



g§sas-s 



Igssssss 






, 2§|§5S8 






a« 



'gRSSSS^S^ 






-S|S§ 






'•Sga*';^^ 



ggS^Sg) 



gggcogg 



'!?5:s-"*s 



ooeo • 'iH 



^(Di-iCCCt 



8SS 



2||s«ga 



'8-5 



^eo^iog 



s«S 



:8 



2-gfe§ 



SfeSsf I 



..t 
it 






iMi 



2 3 iff?! 



ll 



if? 
is! 






ilili 



t3 

o 



o 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



299 



s 




• 8 


' 




s s 


- 1 


3 


*^ 1 55 


i 1 


2 


OB 


s 5 




ajg 


i g 


t* 


Ills 


' 1 


S 


§ § 


a g 


S4 


§ 1 




e^ 








sg 




#9 


§|§ 






' 3 




: 

i 


ii 


■ 

1 c 
o 





Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



800 



The Immigration Commission. 



I 
I 



:! i 



•^13 I 



is s 
Ml. s 



'S 



I;. 



3 ;s S 

§ 1 

i 



I 



S 



51 



^ 

s 



n 

62 



1^ 



i! 






i 



I 



Is 



(3 

o 



agsg 



O^Ag 



•s-^js 



s*s 



F^gi^e 



8'^2 



isg-^e 






5| :a25?S 






§SSil§§§ 



sgssa-- 









Ei§IIS«5 



C4 ^ 9 1^ CI '<«■ 00 



§|S^SS$ 



25{25!9 



§S§lgiS 



eo»o i-iN 1^ 



"^SSSSSS 



sgSgsiS 



-SS;SSt;;ii 



*85SIS'-;5S5 



'^^SSSS^ 



'-28S5";38 



SSS*2S 



..^w- 



gglgSgS 



§B asggg 






^823 



— S 



^g*g 



og^o 



§ -"s- 



""8 



oiioce 



«»|S5 



^S 






si. 



^ 3 
o o 



^gckS : : : : : *^ :a 
8 : tl:-!-l its : I 

" I llllljli I hstfs 



I 



il 
II 

II 
11 
II 



o 



«3 

o 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



801 



s 






s 






8 


jgs 


g 


s 


c4 


is 


S 

s 


e» 


§ 


§8 


a" 




S 


r 


i 


^ 








o» 


" 






^ 

s 


g 








s 


'uS 


i 


•^ 


CO 


ei 




s 


c^ 

V 


IS 


9 


s 




i 
1 


1 


] 


t 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



302 



The Immigration Commissi<». 



I 



•^ i 



I 



^- 1 



I 



S 






00 

H 

•J 



11 



I 



I 



-as 



t4 
O 



8§SS 



sgss 



9g»eog5 



'^?- 



-^R-^s 



^cp 






- 93 



s^ 






s§S§§l3 



2g«^a 



- §is«§i§ 



5SS^g§S 



sisgss^ 



§iiis§§ 



g§SS;3c3S 



gg:3gs^? 



SSiiSSi 



ss 



V ^-N^--H- 






a|||88g 



'ggssa? 



|RS«as 



sg|sa3^ 



■*§88«Ji2 



-^8^2 



bco^eocoio 



s»SSa8§s 



^SrSS 



illll '° 



'spi 



f-if-ioeo:; 






'-"-•Xf-!* 



8S| 



S2gS| 



Ml 



c d 

II 

V 

hi 






Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



803 



8 


3 






«« 


9 


g« 


g 


s 


i 

to 


ii 

8- 


00 


a 


i 


|§ 


s 

a 




3 


r 


i 


s 


§ 


to* 


§ 

•- 


Si 


s 


00* 




9 


s 


IS 
a 


a 


s 


3 

^ 


IS 


S 
«- 


^4 


g 






«0 


s 


§9 


1 


2 


1 




S 

9 



np! 
3 ^ i " 



o 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



304 



The Immigration Commission. 






I 



I 






-^^^ I 

S J 8 

••§1 ^ 

cs a a 



r. 



I 



1^ -. o 

8 
s 



S 



u 

1-3 

n 



il 



agsg 



4 
it 



3 



II 



I 



I 



3. 



s 






^8 

U>co 



;::|»| 



rt«p«oo 



§?-"*• 



ag'^g 






§2«8§5SI« 



issSiiS 



33-" '^9'' 



^zu^^m 



g|«S2S5 



glg§gl§ 



2 CO C>1 <-< !>• t* C 

cT CO 



ss^iiss 



gggii^g 



ll^ssas? 



SS"S988 



isissis 



»ceo ^•^^,-1 



«iSs25a 



as* 



Ssgif=a§ 



8|3S1I»SS 



^OO^'^'OCl 



t* go a; 9» o «-• t- 



C^Sa§S9S 



28S$''-S8 



f25SIS*S5& 



■• jjcjgMow 



R§§gi5§8 



ana 



111 a 

5 3 O O 

1% ^ 



I 3 

o d 



ssg§§ 



s^l^g 



Og«| 



:'"8 



:g'§ 



•ss*5 









^2-5 



'S§Sg 



J" 
:?2 



II 






§3 



S^ffipqc^H 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



305 



g 


00 


ii 


1 
1 


! 


fH 


5 


I- 


s 


§ 






1 

8 


s 


i 






CO 


^ 


S2 


i 


« 


i 


lis 




s 






2 


$ 


i 


ci" 




8 




to 




g 


ss 


s 


* 


- 


f 


•-T 


S 






5? 


j 


i 




i 

c 





Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



806 



The Immigration G>mmission. 



I 



^ 7 



•rs i 



II I 



I" 

■S 



1 






o 



e5 



ir 



£ 



I 



I 



3 



1 



t 



11 

POQ 



«S«8 



sgss 



'S^!? 



ogco^ 



«a«5 



'S :S 



i-4tO»4M 



§§iSi§l 



e^ 1^ «9 <« 1^ e Oft 



SSS-'S* 



Ok W »^ ^H ^ CO CO 



is^ssis 



gl-^ssscs 



SSS^iSS 



SSC4 



SIIpISI 



§S§S§§I 



SSaiSss 






siigsis 



Sfl^ 



sssiSis 



Sg8;?S2S3 



g«,^^ 



2§S22S8; 



^||tS^S9 



gSS«R8 



-^82- 



i-ieoo»o»co^r<- 



iSs'^is 






a3=«g 



"i^S 



to e>««i>>aft<2 

5 '^ 2 a 



-sg-^S 



og^i 



:S :8 



§1 






i 



!1 

OS 

S9 



mm 



s 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



307 



s 




§1 


a 






CO 


s~ 


i 


s 


S3 




i 


s 


S 








S 


13 


§ 


<D 


CO 


§§ 
' 


1 


9 


o 


raw 

2 


§ 

^ 


3 




ii 

CO 




<D 


s 


00 


1 

00 


•Q 


So 


g2 


i 


^ 


§ 


IS 


i 


§ 


t 

V 


*-• 




1 




o 


1 





Digitized by 



Google 



308 



The Immigration Commission. 



I 



^ 



§ 
8 



»0 '-i 



ll 
If 






I 



I 

I 



n 

e2 



Is 



1 



^*5I 



I 



3 



9 



OS 



3 



Is 

|30Q 



o 



rsR 



6:g2 



§ is"' 



S» 



s'si gs*"! SES" ^-"1 S 



— §8 g-^-" sas 



SK 



*-iiH eotoi^ 



ss^ s-^ 



'^SS 8 









.-s 



^ 5 SRgSS 



lAPm^p; 



^ iilll 




• 



^ to CO CO 00 



i §SS- SSS"S 



3 

o 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



809 



«^ 


•9 


3 


1 ^ 


2 








r. 


II §8 


1 






■ 


r 


n 






li 


c* I 


ct 






- 


§^ 


1 






CO 


§2 


§ 






S j 


3 








Ijoor^ 


o» 








lls^ 


3 






r" 


«H 








^c 


S 




t CM 


E 


WW 


1 

s 


4 


i \ 

i \ 

» 

1 


p 




1 





Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



310 



The Immigration Commission. 



o5 



I 
I 
I 



3 

O 






9 



I 






II 



rl 



©I 



H 
A 



»9 



I 



1 

a 






O 



g"!* 8 



^ So 



«:s 



|-g5 



32* 



58- 



9S 



5S- 



8««5| ^^2->^ gg^gg 



« :gg : Ig-^ : SSSS 



ag 



»a 



S-" 



E>r« ^loc* 



^""i^ 



•*c*-^t-t £!f«S 



gggsg £5" 



ii 



n 



If 



5 o 






lllll ' 



hi 



III 
»> 



o 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



811 



• 


§ 


eee«* 


H « 


r 


S3 


i 




!- 


1-1 »i« 


i *^ 


n55 


1^ 


i 




o 

CO 


i: 




Hc« 


■• 


1 




CM 


: i 






«•-« 


e» 




(j 




<0 


|§§ 


g 




^pH 


i ** 


00 


lis 


1 




8 

CO 








si 


a 










II '^^ 






7 • 




■ 


s« 


s 




1 1 




1 


1 s • 


s 




a 


11 




1 


b-" 


9 


o 


00 


C«r-li 


H ^ 


(X> 


s 


S 


i 

i 


I : 


I** 

hi 

Pi 


(i 


p 


o 


c 





Digitized by 



Google 



312 



The Immigratioa Commission. 



I 



^ 

4 



I 



J 



I > 

i ^ 
I i 

I i 



1 



o 

J" 



^ 



I 



•iwj<n poBJo 



-peyodai )0M 



I 

1 



Wox 



-p9)jodai )o^ 



•oSjaioj Joq^o 



•creiltni 



•qs|Ji 



-MaiqoH 



'UVllUOQ 



•qsnaaa 



'OJoq-eAnva xv\ox 



If 






ll 

>• ► 

IS 



•mox 



-poyodax ^OK 



*iiS|ei20j iaq)0 



•oBirni 



•qsiJi 



'MttiqdH 



'II9UIi80 



•qsn^ua 



•mox 



•ireipui 



-OiSo^ 



•«nniM 



o 






5S*S- 



00 • '^CO 



S'-as^ 






|"?§a 



g-as 



s-a|s 



5 •cot-io 



a-^aas 



2Sg?5 



"SSS 



^?J« : 



°SoSS 



e«»Ot-i»-i 



g«^ 



eot-ao« 



eocoMco 



"aws" 



.^2eo2C«»c« 



f-4aoe>«r» -entH 



I 



II 



s 



s-a"— 



OO '»OC*r^Tt 



t- I' -HN 



\1 



a' 






gnu 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



313 



s 


S 


SI 






c« 


S-^ 


» 


& 


|S 


i 


] 


o» 1 


o» 


eo 


i" 


^ 


•* 


§" 


§ 


«o 


l$- 


s 


« 


Si 




to 


: 


g 


1 


s- 


9 


s 


P-" 


! 


^ 


li-" 


i 




hi 


S; 




3: 


9 




ss- 


s 


a> 


i" 


i 


1 


$- 


^ 


w 


£2^ 


2 

•-• 




ii»i 


s 


^ 


|r 


§ 




l-i 


f^ 




llai 


2 


'•< 


11 ^^ 


3 


i 

1 
1 

1 


1 

3 


i 

1 

s 

o 







79340'~VOL 36—11- 



-21 



Digitized by 



Google 



814 



The IiDinigrati<» G>imms8ioa. 






I 



"S> 



1 g 
t^ g 

I ^ 

! 



•3 



f 



t 



s 



■motpuuD 



■pstjodu }0{{ 



I 



•WOX 



'po^jodtti %oii 



*ii8]OJ0| s»mo 



•WIWI 



•wi 



'MttiqoH 



*II1UIJ9{) 



'iisnsna 



•iuoq-«An«a i«;ox 



I 



r 



II 



Tnoi 



*po)jodaj )Ofii 



*ii8loio| jmno 



•ireiWI 



•IPW 



'MttiqdH 



inniu9{) 



•qsnaua 



WOi 



'iniipiix 



^M*»N 



■•»mM 



^ II iogeoge<9<Oto 



•o -^r^ 



II «. 



II r 



-II .« 



o» »42Xco^cme>« 



5«j5c 



■^a«£; 



dL 



gf^l^W^^ 



s :a 



SI ^^'"S ^^** 



.fH .e« *^ 'W^ 



S3 S^-*§ SS:^-' 



-II 



3 33- 



9 



-^S « 






1^ 



»h<5r40,> 



1 
5 



-ga 



§1 -2« 



« 



il 



:83 



&: 



s s 



III 



SJoiS 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



316 



"S^gSS 



8«|«a 



»4e4 1-4 00 04 00 



o-.^ 



:^ :8 :«■ 



«'9'*a3s 



-^8 



s-^ 



S :• 



S :« 



^a-'l-s 



•^s-g^s 



S55 



8- 



$- 



I 



'I 

p 

I 






H 6- 



Digitized by 



Google 



316 



The Immigration Commission. 



I 






P 



511 



-J9A0 pa« OOO'IS 



OOO'lf 
Japan ptre psgt 



'09ZS 
i9pan pntB Qgf 



OSt Japan 



-II 



'Xpio peog joqinnx 



'peuo 
-«IJdiii| poB pong jaqmciN 



'(p9M0d9J 

)(m )ii9ixiTisiana pmi^B) 
p9aos}idtii| JO poag jaqom^ 



'in«dp 0} P9aa9)ii9s jaqoTOK 



'ocresni J9<iuin^ 






I 



I 



I 



*p9)Jodaj %on 



5?« 



'8SS -2 



S :g«> -5-10 



'9)«iiinud)9piii 



1" 



sa s 



88di )nq SJTO^ oz 



8991 )nq SJ1B9^ 01 



-ftiTO^ 01 ^nm 
SS9I )nq u«9A 8 



'SJvaX 9 nvu) 
SS91 )nq jt»A I 



2{: 



899{ )nq sq^nooi £ 



'sq^aont 
creq) 689^ 



^ «H«oioo •mcii-i 



-"•••oMao 00 



c» •«-* W -i-i 



t^jjioSS ^fl 



^SSS 



v^l^tHr^ C0C4«C« 



'4t»^aoio eoo>H 



'S'*??: §53*^ 



«oo 'v^r^ ooioctee 



^ 

^ 



*p9aos|jdiii| j9qainM 



is-^ 



§ :2f!$s as3;ss 



aff^ss ss^s 



*p9pi]9d8ns 
9oa»9iB8 8iz|A«q J9quxnM 



S 2?S»;3 23553 



Ci^^-'S? 88*** 



*p9|aiAnoo J9qt[mM 



^r 



S2^§ SiS99S; 



$§SgS ggsr: 



I 



^ 



s 

n 



I 

i 



iod9 3 liii 

•Sgsl g IH'Sl It 



lis 






1 



5^ 
OS 



11^ M 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



317 



^ M 





I ; ^ 


li 


II ^ 


1 




: : : 




1^ 


9-4 • ;i 


"• : • 




S 


: : : 


i i ■* 




«D 


'** I I' 


-^ i ;: 




2 




: ; "^ 


^ 


« 




'^ : "^ 1 : 


o 




.' : "* 


«D 






1" 


« 


«« \* 


o^ g • 


g 


m^^t 


1"' 


1^ 




H ; CI 

: : 


.^ 




mt '. et 


1= 


w* J^< 


"i "T 


|a 


C«ioco; 


5« § « 


|{§ 


|«.-i' 


o« (5 « 


||§ 




Nil 


00 


«o«| 


8" §1" 


S 


-»*'*' 


s- s||s 


g 


ass 


r- il. 


III 


n| 


ill 

ojz; 


1 







qOQ 



I 

p 



Digitized by 



Google 



318 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table 16. — Previous convictions of j)ersons convicted, by general nativity and race: New 
York covji of general sessions, October 1, 1908, to July 1, 1909, 

[ThJs table does not include 40 persons not r^ortlns complete data.] 



Genenl nativity and race. 


Number 
con- 
victed. 


Number 

no pre- 
vious con^ 
victions. 


Number reporting each speciftsd 
number of previous oonrio- 
tions. 




L 


2. 


8or 
more. 


Total 


Native-born of native Cathen 

White 


414 
210 

1 


308 
150 

1 


74 
40 


10 
9 


13 
2 


106 


Negro 


51 


Indian 














Total 


625 


468 


114 


28 


15 


157 






Native-bom of foreign father, by race of father: 
Englbh 7^.. 


29 
112 
94 
208 
83 
48 
27 


10 
87 
60 
218 
61 
38 
19 



14 
23 
54 
13 
7 
6 


2 
7 
9 
12 
5 
3 
3 


2 

4 
2 
14 

4 
1 


10 


German 


25 


Hebrew 


34 


Irish 


80 


Tt^lfan . , , 


22 


Other foreign • 


10 




8 






Total 


691 


An 


123 


30 


27 


180 






Total natJvp-bom 


1,316 


070 


237 


67 


43 


846 






Foreign-bom: 

English 


40 
123 

11 
241 

02 

232 
18 
16 
12 

13 
9 

60 
8 


84 
95 
8 
182 
76 

190 
18 
12 
U 

11 
8 

40 
4 


3 
15 

3 
41 

9 

27 


2 

7 


2 
5 


6 


(Winan ..»,*.^a»». 


27 


Greek 


3 


Hebrew 


10 
6 

6 


8 

1 

1 


89 


Irish 


16 


Italian 


3) 


Maeyar 




Negro 


3 

1 

2 

1 

10 
3 




1 


4 


Pc^ 


1 


Russian 






2 


Scandinavian ...... . 






1 


Otherfbreign^ 


1 
1 




11 


Not reported 


4 






Total foreign-bora 


874 


707 


117 


33 


18 


167 






Not reported 


32 


23 


8 


1 




9 






Grand total 


2,222 


1,700 


362 


100 


60 


533 







• ''Other foreign" hidudes 5 Bohemian, 1 Canadian. 1 Cuban, 1 Danish, 1 Dutch, 6 French, 1 Qnek, 
4 Magyar. 6 Negro, 1 Norwegian, 1 Portuguese, 6 Russian, 1 Scandinavian, Sootcb, 3 Swedish, 2 Swiss, 

f Other fonfm" includes 9 Austrian, 1 Belfian, 4 Bohemian, 1 Brasilian, 2 Canadian, 2 Cuban, 1 
Chinese, 3 Duilsn, 3 Dutch, 1 Finnish, 9 French. 1 Japanese, 1 Lithuanian, 1 Mexican, 1 Norwegian, 1 
Roumanian, i Scotch, 1 Servian, 1 Slovak, 2 Spanish, 5 Swedish, 8 Swiss, 1 Syrian, and 1 West Indian. 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



319 



Tablb 17. — Prevums convictions of persons convicted^ by offense: New York court 
of general sessions, October 1, 1908, to July 1, 1909. 

[This table does not include 40 persons not reporting complete data.] 



Offense. 


Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
reporting 
no pre- 
vious con- 
victions. 


Number reporting each specified 
number of previous convict 
tions. 




1. 


2. 


3or 
more. 


TotaL 


Offenses against chastity: 

Bipimy 


6 

8 


5 










nHme iignjfiftt nature .x........ 


1 


^ 




2 






Total. 


13 


11 


1 


1 




2 






Offenses against public policy: 

Bribery 


5 
82 
3 
63 
2 
6 
5 


5 
70 
2 
58 
2 
6 
5 










Crimes against public health and safety 

Fal<in r^.<itration . 


11 

1 
5 




1 


12 
1 


Oamimr. . ... 






5 


Libei.!\J... ..:;:;;:::::::;:::::::::::::;: 








Perjury 


1 






1 


Various provisions excise law, etc 


















Total 


166 


147 


18 




1 


19 






Offenses acainst the person: 

Abandonment 


13 
13 

1 
273 

39 
27 
33 
3 


11 
12 


2 

1 






2 


Abduction 






1 


Abortion 




1 
3 

1 


1 


Assault 


234 

33 
27 
22 
2 


29 

4 


7 
1 


'^ 


Homicide 


6 


Rape 




Robbery 


6 

1 


2 


3 


11 


Suicide. 


1 










Total 


402 


341 


43 


10 


8 


61 








1 

468 

13 

4 

73 

3 

080 

19 

68 


1 
277 

4 
68 

3 

769 
18 
45 












126 
2 


40 
2 


25 


191 


Extortion 


4 


False posonations and cheats 




Forganr 


13 


2 




15 


Fraud 




Larceny 


148 
8' 


40 
1 
2 


23 
3* 


211 


Malicious mischief and Injuries to property. . . . 
Receiving stol<?n property 


1 
13 






Total 


1.610 


1,184 


297 


87 


51 


435 






Total deflnftd offenses .............. ^ ^ ^ » ^ 4. 


2,200 


1.683 


359 


98 


60 


617 






Offenses not defined 


22 


17 


3 


2 




5 






Orand total | 


2,222 


1,700 


362 


100 


60 


622 







Digitized by 



Google 



320 



The Immigration Commissioiu 



I 



I 






&^ 



.2i 

I 



I. 



«t 



00 

H 

S 

m 



1 
j 

"3 

1 


•ii«108pxonon«ioiA 


! 


; 






; 




j^ J »-< ji 


i- 




*8oao^ Snfiioiqi, 


«^ 


-^ 






-^ 




i : i HI 


! ^ 


'jBAfOAai Snnooqg 


:- 


f-i 






-^ 




: : i il 


-poooos 'XjoqqoH 




\ 


w 1 


« 


d 




: : : il 


« 


•uoawonpsiH 


«^ 


^ 






-^ 




: : ; il 


: -^ 


*£uMn[%n9d 


« 


« 


•M 


• w 


'T 




::: jf' 


^ iO 




: 




'^ : 


: •" 


- 




Mi HI 


ilh 


-pnoooe 
'^ a a J « I pouo 


»-< 


- 


^ : 


: - 


c^ 




: : : ! || 


! II ** 

ii- 


'ioaoni powo 








- '- 


-^ 




\\\ \i 


•»imq8ij 






•»^ 


■^ 


- 


; : ".'^ 


: : : ^ 


ii" 


-^ODPUOO itfJOpjOSia 


•> 


- 


^^ 


! *^ 


CO 


I ''^ ! 


: i : ^ 


ih 


•aixni©|j»lirooo 




I 


: : 




1 : 


• . .»-i 


: : i •^ 


^ 


'snodTOM 8ii)XLnso 


- 


9-4 


•^1 


^ C9 


l« 


iiii 


-ii - 


^ 
d 


•pjpw 'iLreiaina 


M 


o 






c 


1 iiii 


iii ill 


*paooo6 'iLreiSins 


•> 


- 






- 


i iiii 




*-t 


'£jn3\2mq_ 






w* ' 


: - 


- 


1 iiii 


iii ill 


: -^ 


•Smq pa^dma^y 


•^ 


1-4 


'^ \ 


• •- 


c« 


1 iiii 




i *^ 


*nq paidurei^v 




1 


l« 


i •* 


c« 


1 iiii 




ii" 


•piTO 'iPi^wv 


•C« 


W 






e< 


;;-* 


1 I 1 "O 


• e<- 


'9iznJ0dM )oa j»qmnK 


^ 


-^ 


C» \ 


i *^ 


CO 


• • \w4 


I '. '. ^ 


- 6 


-snon 
•OfAiioo snofAAid oiom 
JO rao Sn^JOdM JoqnmK 


aou: 


•o 


1 lOiO 


: o 


gj 




" : : " ' 


'raonofAooo 8no}A 
•«jd oa innjodoj J9qmnK 


S9 


e 


s?; 


- «j 


jH 


1"" 


«-B- 


^ S 


•poiOfAiioo J9qmnK 


^3 


t: 


S3» 


■^ S 


g 


1 ^:s^^ 


8^-^ 1 ' 


^ S 




1 


1 i 

1 i 
"s i 


N 


fc : : 
■° : : 

.2 ; ; 
o : I 

^; : 

S : : 

&;: 


s 1 


1 
1 


•low 


Total foreign-bom 


i i 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



821 



i 
t 

1 


•-^neinjAtnaa 




I ; 


1 .^c« *H •€« 


: • 


1 <e 


'Asamax 


''W* 


: ^ 


1 : 


•^ • • J 


I ^ 


1 ^ 


*soao)8 Sopiiojqx 






I i 


• ^ * * 


•i^ 


*4 


•aoarad Bnopjdms 














'Imopog 






1 i 








•Xj9qqoH 






1 i 








•iCj9qqoJi»idra9MV 






: 








•^^jaaojd 
O9io)8 aofAiaaoH 


eo-N 










1 ^ 


*IKioooe '9d«H 




:^^ : : : 


i '^ 


c« 


'£nMi9[ iwoi 


52* 


j s^ 


»o 


1 2 eo CO ^ 


cs s 


1 ^ 


•iauora 






1 i 


i'^ : : : 


: '^ 


1 "■ 


•joiqasnn snojonvH 








• ^ I ! ! 


: •^ 


1 " 


•poo 


cseo 


•o 


1 • •< 


3^ : i*^ 


: - 


1 'A 

1 "^ 


•^ug'itaoajvipinuo 


- : 


: -* 








1 " 




eo»^ 


^ 


1 : 




W* »H 


•o 


'Sunned 


: : 




1 i' 


4 t • • ! 


: - 


1 *" 


•vmpaooXiJ»pjo«ia 


^ • 


• ^ 


1 !' 


« • ^^ ; 


^ 


1 "^ 


•saodvoA Sof^LTBO 




: : 


1 i 


jc« 1 |f^ 


I « 


« 


.ftWl8jnq 2u]AuB0 


CO • 


• eo 


1 i 


i j j : j 


i j 


1 " 


•pjpw '^JBiaina 


S'* 


: ^ 


1 ^^«0 CSi-40 


e, j5 


I 9 


'paooM '^j«[8jns 


« j 


• M 


1 -i- iii 


• M 


1 ■* 


*)BiQ 'iLra[Sjna 


-"^ 


• « 


1 '- ~ i i 


• t' 


1 ^ 


, -PJI^III 

•^j»l2jnq po^dmewv 


CbtO 


^ 


:- 


KCO 11; 


P-* to 


1 • 


•.^jtiSmq pe)din9))y 


« : 


• C» 


i- 


«••-;• 


', ^ 


1 "* 


■jouoepd 
joonoewpaidinoMy 




: : 


:■ 


4 • • • ( 


: - 


1 " 


•PJTW 'linwBV 


M • 


i '^ 


1 : 


jco ^ ••-« 


• to 


r* 


•pnoooe '^inwBv 


•W 


i *** 


1 i 


:*- : : : 


: - 


1 "^ 


t|gju '?inw8v 


j I 


j I 


1 : 


: : - : : 


: ^ 


1 "^ 


•pjfqi 


:*- 


: '^ 


^ 


;« 1 1 j 


■ eo 


i ' 


•uononpqv 


^ ; 


: *" 




: : : : : 




1 - 


•Scnviodol 9oa j9qiimN 


^1^ 


i '^ 




^w \ I , 


i •* 


" 


•TOOjiajAnoD srno| Aojd Qjom 
JO aao 9a))Jodoi jaqnmM 


i;c9 


i s 


•-as '-'*^ 


^ S 


s 


'uonojAnoo eno|A 
•oid on anjviodoj j9qmnN 


5:S- 


j 


a«« 2«3 


ft 


s 


*p«|9}Aaoo j9qmnM 


as- 


'Is 


1 s;a^ sss:s 


"S 


n 




1 


Native-bom of native 
father: 

White 

Ne«ro 


3 


Native-bora of foreijcn 
father, by race of 
father: 
German 


m 

3SS ^o 


1^ 


** • 

ii 



Digitized by 



Google 



322 



The Immigration Commission. 



I 






^ 
*> 



I 



fi 



I? 






I. 



9i 



I 



1 
1 

a 

a 
8 

i 


'As%n9 \njMLV\uci 




1 


; ; 


i '^i 


I ; 

1 • 


•• 


•iooBnij, 




'^ • J 


: -^ 




CO 


•woo^s ai|i&OJTlX 




i : ! 




: 
: 


^ 


•aoarad snopjdsng 




»-• J ' 


: 




Ih 


•-/Cmopog 






:-• 


: - 


-: 


^ 


•i:j9qqoH 








^ 


•-^roqqojpa^dnrai^v 








- 


-:- 


«o 


'i£;j9dojd 
aafois 8a|A|900H 


f^r^ i i 


i ** 


*paoo9e 'ed«H 


: : : : 






i" 


•^ireoJBi %n9d 


COC» »hM 


* s: 


eo 


.s 


ipjje^anoo Sniswj 










— 


•jomosnn roopiriH 










- 


•pao 
-ooB 'iCawjvi pnuo 


«« ^ j 


N M 




11^ 


•»sjg*^uaowipnwo 


I '. '. ', 


-H -^ 




Ih 


'pnoo9S 'Xa90J«i 
pQBjd p«)dnid))y 


^C4 '• '• 


H ^ 




!- 


*9ixnq9ij 












I'- 


'pnpaoo ^{iepjosia 










j 


ll:!. 


*BaodB3Ai Su|Xu«o 






-^ : 


• 


•8(00^ 

«8J9i3jnq aai^xreo 








: : 




<o 


•pjnn 'Xreisma 


rfSM jrt 


g5 




3 


1)1X0096 '^rtiSjna 


•" : : : 


- 




Ih 


•%si\} *Xret8jna 


CO>H 1 1 


-H >0 




Ih 


'^reiSmq pa)dni9))y 


^c« ''• 


! *^ 




Ih 


•Xreiamq pe^dnroj; v 




'^ : : 


•^ 




Ih 


•janospd 
jo9noswpo^dra»wv 








: : 




Ih 


•pnqi 'ipiBSSV 








-. 




Ih 


•paoooe 'iinwsy 










-j 


Ih 
Ih 


'%^sg '%\niBBsy 






»-• • 


i 


•pjiqi 
'jtnwsB peadraoiav 












Ih 


•nononpqv 












Ih 


•SoDiodoj aoo J9qninN 




-^ : : 


-H « 


CO 


Ih ■■ 


•TOOipjAnoo snoi A9jd aioui 
JO oao 9a];jodaj joqmnK 


2^ *« 


=*• s 


g 


*ao[)3)Aaoo snoiA 
-wd on ganjodw jaqumK 


«o 2«* 


2 Sg 


00 


1? 


•p9«piAaoo j^qranK 


i5S S2 


^ § 


- 


15 




1 


' 

ii 
1 


c 




uiner foreign a 

Total foreign- 
born 


1 


c 

g 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



823 



r-l °° 



1 

1 

1 


'XoobjSba 


; 


; 


! ^ 






ii 


i n 


: : - 




^ 


'Sum injM«iun 


^ 


^ 


i 






Ih 


1 iii 






. -^ 


'i!oimux 








'<w4 '» 


: '^ 


Ir 


1 iii 




1-4 C4 


•ftinnidoqg 






• 




: : 


11 • 


II -ii 


oo j a» 


a» 


•pz '^JoqqoH 






; 


^ I ', 


: ^ 


II- 


iii 






-^ 


'X^jodoid 
treiojs 2IIJAIW0H 








! i'^ 


: ^ 


-. 


: : : 






- 


•asi'Jo;q8n«inrajf 


-« 


^ 


II i 


: : : 




- 


II iii 




II 


- 


•iUOWBI W9J 


lOrH 


to 


1 :— i 


" S 


s 


^«o»^ 


- =1 


^ 


•snonBaosjaduii 








»-• • • 


I ^ 


^ 


• « • 






^ 


•XiJodojdoiXjnfai 










: : 


l 


• • • 




■ 


II i 


•8iqi3iJjooni 








•»-• I 


I ^ 


"^ 


• • 1 






. '^ 


'P2'^Qgai«ipiiuo 


0» 


CO 


^ 


^^ : 


i •* 


o 


• 01 ' 


' i ^ 


00 


'XnaojBi pauo 


: 


: 




I '»w* 


M c« 


d 


• • • 




II 


e. 


•pz '^uoarei 
poBJS p9)dnie^iy 


^.H 


04 






: : 


d 


• • • 




II 


c« 


•pj; '^ja8joj 


: 


j 


^ 




i-lh 






II 


^ 


•5onp 
-noo ^[japjosia 


-^ 


-^ 


C4 


'.ct \ 


. "^ 11 •« 


Im ' 


'•i'll 


Ok 


•sioo; 
,8JF|8jnq8uiliJB0 


: 


j 








i i : 


-i-l 


"* 


•P8 '^reiama 


M 


CI 


• es 




! M 


t 


:" : 


i i "II 


»o 


•P8 'ipiBSSY 


i-l 


1H 


: 






Ih 


1 ii- 


i : ^1 


M 


•W'^inwsv 


: 


1 




'^ : i 


I ^ ^ 


1 ii- 


-H I C» 11 


CO 


'Snpjodai )oa jaqnmf^ 


COlH 


•* 


^ 


I 1 ', 


*. I-l to 


iii 


N .H CO II rH II Ok 


•siion 
•oiAuoo snofAOjd ojom 
JO 900 Sonjodoi JoquniM 


d*' 


2 


CO CO 00 CO «o 


" 55 


55 


MOkCQ 


2-" ^hp 


'snonofAnoD snopi 
-Old oaSnriiodox jaqnmK 


ss; 


S 


sa^*^' 






2^2 


s- S 


111^ 


'poioiAooo jaqnra^ 


?2§ 


s 


S«S28 


S 


S^SJ 


§« s 


- i 




i 

1 

1 ^ 


S ; 

li 

35 


• & 


S : 

o ' 

ii 

s ■• 
1: 

|ll 


H 
iff 

hi: 


z; 


> 

1 
1 


Foreign-bom: 

German 

Hebrew 

Irish 


utner loreign o 

Not reported 

Total foreien-born 


1 


1 

a 





a 
I 

S 



9 



ST 

If 



3:§ 



iu 






¥ 


^i 


oCl 




f^^l 


-y^^ 


•^^z 


J3-^ 


■&«§ 


C§ - 


a^-o 


^i^ 


^ 4> O 


-P^'>5 




Q-c 


--M-i 


J3V 2 


•22 5;a 


5 3-3 


-t;^ 


fiSc^ 


lis 


Pi 


S - ft* 


foreign 
foreign 
lish,2 


&%£ 


55^ 


OOo" 



Digitized by 



Google 



824 



The ImmigraticMi Commission. 



o 



tS 



L 



is 



01 

2 

m 



1 

q 
1 

1 
1 


•iComwflBA 


Of 


« 


t * * 


! ! '. 


net 


1 ^ * 


.1^ . . 


©• 


1 


•itnoa inji&eina 






• • •» 


H I ^ 


P 




: : i : 


i :l 


*paoo98 'XioqqoH 






* !^ 


I • w* 


t-« 




'.w* '. ', 


. fH 


•WB'^JoqqoH 


^ 


•- 


'.^ 


: : '^ 


e« 




^ ', '.I 


: : ^ 


•iE)jedojd 
iBI0)s aniAieooH 






^ jClr 


H j ««• 


'•i 




p4 I I '• 


I fH 


'paooos'odtH 




: 


^ I I 


: : "^ 


^ 










'ed«H 






^4 1 


I ^ 


^ 










•Xaironi ua; 


f-l 


- 




: : ": 


»- 










•|»rqo 
•vpn snoioiiBFi 


'^ : 


- 




: : : 


•^ 










•AlIMI9{ W9J 


»'# 


a 


«et^ekN 


oe, g 


5? 


ii* 


« • «oe<«c< 


•- 25 




'saopsaofijodiiii 






I '.^ 


: ; ^ 


h 




• » • • 




'paoo9S 
'itoaorai pnuD 


«- 


o» 


<^«r«De 


* : 9 


l« 


fH^ 


■* i i \^ 


: ^ 


'itaaojti pouD 


•o • 


•o 


^^.o 


• • lO 


s 


*4 i 


• • • t^ 


: *^ 


>piiooo8 'Xnaojti 
pinua p<ndn»MV 


•^ 


-« 


i^i^^e 


' i ** 


« 




?« I • j^ 


i ** 


•pjTO '^joSjoj 
















: -" 


1 
1 


•no!U<nxa 






: : : 






I^ 




: -^ 


•»onp 
-ooo Xiiopjosra 


i'^ 


l-l 


|eo jc 


' i * 


«o 




ow ! i 


iH 


^snodTOM SniXuvQ 


"^ : 


-• 






" 




: : : :'' 


. fH 




•sjooj 
8«JViSjnqaaTXjj«o 


•^ : 


-* 


: i-^ 


: ; ^ 


h 




M '. ', '. 


: -^ 




•pjHR 'iJViSjna 


t*CI 


o» 


• weo 


i i *^ 


1= 




p» • • : 


i w 


'ijBlSma 






i> 


: j ro 


« 








-jnq poidurawv 


ro»^ 


-♦ 


1 r- 


■4 1 «0 


s 


!t-* 


; : l'^ 


i *^ 


'pjnD 'liiwssv 


t-* *. 


^ 


1 r- 


• • CO 


■* 




: : :-" 


: '- 


*piioo9e 'iinwsv 


•-M 


eo 


1 ;i~ 


i i •* 


h 








I 


•^sig *?in««sv 


: : 




1 "ii 




h 




^ ', '. '. 


: '- 


1 


•noRonpqv 


w4 '. 


- 


: : : 


: : ^ 


h 




: : : : 


i ;l 


*Sii|;jodai )oa J9qamH 


^ : 


- 






1 *^ 


i*^ 


'^ : : : 


i ^ 


1 


•snoR 
•oiAnoo snof Aojd aioni 
JO I SmwHfai J9qmnN 


ss 


$ 


-*:98S 


3<^ g 


S 


etio^co ocoh- 


- R 




*niqno|AiKK> snofA 
-«jdoa fofyodaj joqnznN 


S$ 


s 


S?S!5J 


^" § 


^ 


s§ss:3 ?:ss 


1 2 




•pepiAQoo joqnniK 


§2 


§ 


ssa; 


5« S 


i 


r5SS2S SS5 


- 8 






i 

1 

1 


a • i 

s •: • 

s : : 
§ :■ 

III 


1 


Native-born of foreign father, by race 
of lather: 

German 

Hebrew 

Irish 




1 
1 


h 


ueorew 

Irish 

Italian (not . ipeclflod) 

Italian, South 

Othorforelm b 


^ 1 
1^ 





Digitized by 



Google 



Gejieral Tables. 



325 



-| 





•* 






^ 




c« 




eo 




»9 




»-• 




-^ 




^ 




- 


^ 


3 




- 


4 






Ofc 




-■ 




-^ 




2 


-i 


CXI 

eo 




s 




CO 




^ 




to 




CO 


4 


w 




CO . 


-^[s 


•lls 


-li 


1 

2 
o 

2 


1 

C 





§ « 

1 1 



15 



I " 

r a" 



I 



I I 



eo 3 

2 I 

- is 

H CO * 

oo ro'u 



i I"* 
^ si 

cvi eo > 



3 S"^ 

B Bf 

a al 



Digitized by 



Google 



826 



The ImmigraticHi Commission. 



Table 22. — Faretan-bom persons oonvicUd, by years in the United States and by race: 
New York court of general sessions, October 1, 1908, to July 1, 1909, 



Race. 


Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
reporting 
mrsin 
TJnited 
Btetes. 


Number in United Stetes eadi spectIM 
number of years. 




Under 3. 


Under 5. 


Under la 


Under 98. 


English 


40 
125 

11 
247 

93 

237 
18 
17 
12 

14 
10 
60 
9 


26 
91 
8 
191 
61 

183 
11 
7 
10 

11 
5 

43 
6 


8 
11 

3 
30 

7 

47 
5 

1 
5 

4 


9 
27 

8 
57 
18 

76 
9 
2 
6 

6 
2 
16 

1 


14 
40 
7 
105 
21 

128 
11 
4 
8 

8 
3 
24 

4 


20 


Oennan 


62 


Greek 


8 


Hebrew 


ITS 


Irish ^. 


84 


T^M^ 


168 


Magyar 


u 


NeSo!;:::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 


6 


FoMfh... 


n 


Russian 


10 


Bcandinavian 


5 


Other foreign^ 


7 


86 


Not report^ 


5 








Total 


893 


663 


128 


227 


877 


5« 







• " other foreign" inchides 9 Austrian, 1 Belgian, 4 Bohemian. 1 Brasilian, 2 Canadian, 2 Cuban, 1 Uiiw>«» 
8 Danish, 3 Dutch, 1 Finnish, 9 French. 1 Jananese, 1 Lithuanian, 1 Mexican, 1 Norwegian, 1 Boomaniaa, 
6 Scotch. 1 Servian, 1 SloTak, 2 Spanish, 5 Swedish, 3 Swiss, 1 Syrian, and 1 Weft Indian. 

Tablb 28. — Political condition ojf foreign-bom males convicted, by race: New York 
court of general sessions, October 1, 1908, to July 1, 1909, 

[This teble inchides only those who were 21 years of age or over at time of coming to the United States.) 





Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 

reporting 

years in 

United 

Stetes 

and 

poUtical 

condition. 


In United Stetes 5 
over. 


yean or 


Race. 


Aliens. 


am 
papers 
only. 




Austrian (race not specified) 


1 
1 
2 
2 
18 

1 
8 

51 
4 

40 

87 

25 

18 

6 

5 

4 
1 
3 

7 

1 
2 
3 


1 






1 


C?anadlan ' * ' 








Danish 


1 






1 


Datch 








EnffMsh 


6 


1 




5 


Finnish 






French «. 


8 
22 

2 
21 

14 
14 


1 
8 
2 
14 

8 
9 
10 




2 


German 


2 


12 


Greek 




Hebrew 


1 

8 

1 
2 


6 


Irish 


8 


Italian, South 


4 


Tt^il^n (fiot ffpen'f^ed) ....... ^ .^ . .. 


1 


Maffvar/ *. . 




Negro 


2 
2 


1 

1 


1 




Polish 


1 


Roumanian 






Russian 


2 
2 


1 
1 


1 




Bran^linayian ..<..<............ 


1 


Scotch 






Spanish ... . 










Swiss (race not snecifled) 




















Total 


230 


105 


62 


11 


42 







Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



327 



TabIiS 24.— P€r«0TM convicted f by offense and by age group: New York court of general 
eeseicTu, October i, 1908, to July i, 2909, 

[Thia table does not indade 7 pencms not reporting complete data.) 





Number within each specified age group. 


Offense. 


Under 
14. 


14 and 
16. 


16 to 20. 


21 to 39. 


40 or 
OTer. 


Total. 


Offenses against chastity: 

Bigamy 






1 
3 


2 
6 


2 

1 


5 


CWmeflT^^in^tr natwe 






9 










Total 






4 


7 


8 


14 










Offenses against public policy: 

Bribery 








6 
60 

1 

29 
1 
6 
6 




6 


Crimes against public health and safety 






20 

1 
2 


6 

1 
84 

1 


86 






3 


GamingT 






66 


Libel 






2 


Perjury 








6 


Various provisions of excdse Law, etc . . 










6 














Total 






23 


107 


41 


171 










Offenses aeainst the person: 

Af^w^noriment 








11 
10 


2 

1 

1 

89 

11 
1 
4 

1 


13 


Abduction 






2 


13 


Abortion. 






1 


AflWHilt 




1 


69 

4 
9 
6 
1 


177 

24 

17 

23 

1 


276 


Homicide 




39 


Rape 






27 


Robbery 






33 


BnUfit^^. 






3 










Total 




1 


81 


263 


60 


406 








Offenses against property: 

Arson 










1 
26 

1 
2 
U 

1 
102 

4 

6 


1 






4 


219 
6 
1 
14 


280 
6 

1 
48 

2 
665 

16 
40 


478 


Extortion 




13 


Falm persofiatioiis and cheats 






4 


Fogefy 




1 


74 


Fraud 




8 


Larceny 


1 


14 


807 

1 
16 


960 


«ty 


20 


Receiving stoten property 






61 










Total 


1 


19 


664 


907 


162 


1,643 




Total defined offenses 


1 


70 
1 


672 

1 


1,284 
17 


266 
8 


2,m 


Ofllensffi not downed 








Qrand total. ^^^ 


1 


21 


678 


1,801 


280 


2,266 





Digitized by 



Google 



828 



The Immigratioa CommissicHi. 



Tablb 25. — Literacy of persons convicted^ by general nativity and race: New York eoitri 
of general seesions, October 1, 1908^ to July J, 1909, 



General nstivitj and raoo. 


Nomber 

con- 
victed 


Number 
reporting 

as to 
literacy. 


Number 
who 
read. 


Number 

who 

read and 

write. 


Native-born of native tethen 

White 


421 
213 
' I 


o419 
213 

1 


• 419 

197 

1 


a419 


Negro 


196 


Indiiui 


1 






Total 


635 


o633 


• 617 


• 616 






Native-born of foreign fattier, bj race of father: 

English 


20 
113 

»7 
302 

48 
35 
48 
27 


20 
113 

97 
302 

47 
35 
48 
27 


20 
110 

97 
800 

47 
32 
47 
26 


29 


Qennan 


110 


Hebrew 


97 


Irish 


300 


Italian (not specified) 


47 


I tal Ian . Sou t h 


33 


Other foreign * 


47 


Not reported 


26 






Total 


eo9 


696 


688 


G88 






Total native-bom 


1.334 


a 1,331 


• 1,305 


• i,aot 






Foreign-bom: 

English 


40 
125 

11 
247 

93 

136 
101 
18 
17 
12 

14 
10 
60 
9 


40 
125 

11 
247 

03 

136 
101 
18 
17 
12 

14 
10 
GO 
9 


40 

122 

9 

212 

89 

91 
68 
16 
15 
8 

11 
10 
54 
9 


40 


German 


122 


Greek 


9 


Hebrew 


212 


Irish 


88 


Italian (not spool fled) 


01 


Italian, South 


06 


Mat; var 


16 


Negro 


15 


PoHsh 


8 


Russian 


11 


Scandinavian 


10 


Other foreign c 


83 


Not reported 


9 






Total foreign-bom 


893 


893 


754 


750 






Not reported 


35 


31 


29 


20 






Grand total 


2,262 


o2,255 


• 2,088 


• 2,083 







• Not including 1 not reporting complete data. 

b ** Other foreign" hicludes 5 Bohemian, 1 Canadian, 1 Cuban, I Danish, 1 Dutch, 5 French, 1 Greek, 4 
Magyar, 6 Negro, 1 Norwegian, 1 Portuguese, 6 Russian, I Scandinavian, 9 Scotch, 2 Swedish, 2 Swiss, and 
1 Welsh. 

c '< other foreign" includes 9 Austrian, I Belgian, 4 Bohemian, 1 Brazilian, 2 Canadian, 2 Cuban, 1 Chi- 
nese, 3 Danish, 3 Dutch, 1 Finnish, 9 French, 1 Japanese, 1 Lithuanian, 1 Mexican. 1 Norwegian, 1 Rou- 
manian, 5 Scotch, 1 Servian, 1 Slovak, 2 Spanish, 5 Swedish, 3 Swiss, 1 Syrian, and 1 West Indian. 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



329 



Table 26. — Literacy ofpermyiM convicted^ by offense: New York court of general sesnons, 
October 1, 1908, to July 1, 1909. 



OfltDse. 


Number 

cm- 

victed. 


Number 
reporting 

as to 
Uteracy. 


Number 
who 
read. 


Number 

who 

read and 

write. 


Oflnaes acainBt ohastitj: 

Pto»»ny 


5 
9 


5 
9 


4 
7 


4 


crime igftinat nature. ....... ^, 


7 






Total 


14 


14 


11 


11 






Oflenns agtinst pablio polic j: 

Briben^ 


5 

3 
65 
3 
6 
5 


5 
85 

2 
65 
• 2 

6 

5 


5 
08 

2 
60 
• 2 

6 

5 


5 


Crimes against pablic health and i^etj 


68 


False registration 


3 


Oamins 


60 


Libel.: 


• 2 


Perjury 


5 


VarJoos proTlsiona ol excise law, etc 


5 






Total 


172 


• 170 


• 147 


• 147 






Ofleoaee aninst the person: 

Abaniionment x...... a ..... .... 


13 

13 

1 

278 

39 
27 
34 
3 


13 
13 

1 
277 

30 
27 
32 
3 


11 

13 

1 

237 

20 
35 
28 
8 


11 


Abduction 


12 


Abortion 


1 


A«ault 


387 


Homicide 


28 


Rape 


• 35 


RoSbery 


38 


Boidde. 


3 






Total 


408 


405 


347 


345 






Oflemne against property: 

AraoD 


1 

479 

13 

4 
74 

3 
991 
20 
61 


1 

479 

13 

4 

73 

3 
990 

20 
61 






Burelary 


456 
9 

4 
73 

3 
944 
20 
54 


454 


BxtStlon 


9 


False personations and cheats 


4 


F<Rgery 


73 


Fread 


8 


Larceny 


943 


Malicious mischief and injuries to property 


30 


Receiving stolen property '..'...'.... 


54 






Total 


1.646 


1,644 


1,563 


1,560 






Total deflnf^l offf^nsee 


2,340 
23 


a 2, 233 
22 


• 2,0g 
20 


• 3.063 


OffensK not defined 


20 






Grand total 


2.362 


• 3,265 


• 2,068 


• 3,083 







79340'- 



• Not including 1 not reporting complete data. 
-VOL 30—11 22 



Digitized by 



Google 



330 



The Immigration Commissicm. 



Table 27. — Conjugal condition ofpergons convicted, by general nativity and race: New 
York court of general sessions , October 1, 1908, to July 1, 1909, 

[This table does not include 4 persons n t reporting complete data.] 



General nativity and race. 


Single. 


Married. 


Widowed. 


Divorced. 


TotaL 


Native-bom of native father: 

White 


276 
139 

1 


135 
71 


9 
8 




420 


Negro 




213 


Indian 




1 












Total 


416 

23 

81 
78 
229 

39 
31 
35 
14 


206 

5 
27 
19 

67 

9 
4 
10 
11 


12 

1 
5 




634 


Native-born of foreign father, by race of father: 
English 




20 


German 




113 


Hebrew 




97 


Irish 


6 




302 






48 


Ttftliftn/RA"t*^ 






86 


btbtf foreign a 


3 
2 




43 


Not reported 




27 








Total 


630 


152 


17 




eoo 








Total native-bom 


946 


358 


29 




1,333 








Foreign-bom: 

English 


23 
73 

8 
187 
58 

91 
63 
12 
13 
6 

9 
6 
37 
8 


14 
44 
2 
59 
31 

44 

37 
5 

4 
6 

5 

3 

21 

1 


3 

7 
1 

1 
4 

1 
1 
1 




40 


G«nnan 


1 


125 


Greek 


11 


Hebrew 




247 


•Irish 




93 


Italian (not «»p«viflAd) 




136 


Italian, SoMt*^ 




101 


Magyar 




18 


NeST::;::::;::::::::. ::...::::::::::::::;::: 




17 


Polish 






12 


Russian 






14 


Scandinavian 


1 
2 




10 


Other foreign b » . . 




00 


Not reportwi 















Total foreign-bom , 


594 


276 


22 


1 


808 






Not reported 


26 


4 


2 




32 








Grand total , 


1,566 


638 


53 


1 


2,258 







• ''Other foreign" includes 5 Bohemian, 1 Canadian, 1 Cuban, 1 Danish, 1 Dutch. 5 French, 1 Greel^ 

4 Mamr, 6 Negro, 1 Norwegian, 1 Portuguese, 6 Russian, 1 Scandinavian, 9 Scotch, 2 Swedish, 2 8wi», and 

» ''Other foreign" includes 9 Austrian, 1 Belgian, 4 Bohemian. 1 Brazilian, 2 Canadian, 2 Cuban, 1 Chtnesa, 
8 Danish, 3 Dutch, 1 Finnish, 9 French, 1 Jf^umese, 1 Lithuanian, 1 Mexican, 1 Norwegian, 1 Bonmaniwi, 

5 Scotch, 1 Servian 1 Slovak, 2 Spanish, 5 Swedish, 3 Swiss, 1 SyriaB, aod 1 Weft Indian. 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



331 



s 



I 



J" 





mox 


3« 


^ 


-rco 


S2 ^^-' 


HC CO 


9 


•oegjge* •«*ce«H 


- s 


1 (^ 






'iMiu90O J9IDQ 














•^ 




J ^ 


1 '^ 




•iLiaqqoH 


^ 


•^ 








^ 








1 ^ 




•it^jodojd 
iraio^s 8IIIAI909H 


^ 


^ 


^ • 


i'* i i : 


i i ** 


€0 


1 jco I • • 


i ^ 


r 




*9dvs 








I I t^ ', 


: : '^ 


'^ 




t • |f-| 


^ 


" 




•Arapaa 






: : 














r 






•wpjnn 
























k 


-p9g)8B«I0 

9oasjoiraanopc|K 


























••»»1*wpn«K 


t 
























•;nad 'iTOoniq 


'•i 
^ 


S 


•-ICI>HC« j ; j 


: i * 


S 


•"^lO^ ^ I 


: s 


:9 




'pmiS 'Xnaojvq 


S 


s 


e4<oa»io ^ 1 j. 


" i s 


35 


-.••- : :- 


-" 8 


S 




'X)j9daido}iLmfDi 






: 1 


















» 


*9Q]nnio 


lO 


to 


: : 


red ^ 1 1 


: : • 


!' 




H I II 


.* *^ 


ss 


i 


'Aj99m^ 


•«•• 


^ 


1 :*^ 


«C1 • • . 


: : * 


1= 


;iHf 


<o . 


■* 


•-• 




•uonjojxa 












N 












•i^ajBS pu5 
miwq ^onqnd 


WFi^ 


CO 


\ j 


• rH m^f^wt 


i i ^ 


t* 




: : '^ : 


: ^ 


00 




•amiBU 
)sn]«3« 9 oi 1 J 3 
























1 


'iLrai3jng 


«o 


« 


;C» 


nc^ .« . 


i-^ 2 


«o 


^^< 


D • ^^ 


• o 


2^ 


i 


•jLwqiJa 
















"" : : : 


i "■ 


^ 




'iUZBaiQ 












• 


r< ; 




: ^ 


^ 




"Jinwsv 


«»H 


eo 




• V *-i • • 


•tH «D 






^ : --• 


• eo 


la 




•uonanpqv 














1^ '» 




: - 


- 




*)Qauniopinqy 






'.'^ 




: : -^ 


" 








»-• 




i 
1 

t 

a 


o : 


\i 


Native-bom of foreign lather, 
by race of father: 

English 

German 


Hebrew 

Irish 

Italian, South 

Italian (not specified) 

Russian 


ii^ 


i 


h 


ueorew 

Irish 

Italian, South 

Italian (not specified) 


1 


1 





Digitized by 



Google 



332 



The Immigration Commission. 



I 



^ 

•o 

a 



;3 

8 

I 



:{1 



f 
^ 



H 

n 



•mox 


122 


S 


! " 




2* 


2 


00 02*^ 


s 


t 


1 -«j5,,«- 


s 


p 




*8asa»0O jaq)o 








1 


















1 




1-* 




1" 


*^aqqOH 


'^ : 


•- 


















'^ 


1 i 


i'^ 




^ : 


e« 1 CO 


uai<ns 8iiiAiaj»H 


'^ : 


^ 










M j 




M 


CO 


1 


•^-^ • 




W "O 


■ad»H 








'^ 












'^ 


'^ 


i 


i'^ 




p» • 


« -* 


'Xmfjdj 






- 4 


















"r 
















•japjnji 






































*p9g|8SBp 
)oa siomainapsiji 


'^ : 


•^ 














-• : 


'^ 


c« 




:"^ 






^ « 


*ja)q8n«|8uvjf 






o 

^ 










N '. 




« 


- 












1" 


•juad '^uaowq 


cow 


^ 


eo-H •<» •« 


» • 


eo 


S 




1M3^ j 


'^ : 


« So 


-pnBjS '^monq 


8« 


CO 


^C gJ<N 




u 


U 






go o 


-^^9dojd (n ^m(tzi 






li 




"^ 


^ • 




M 


C4 


: 








^ loo 


'SofiiniO 












'^ 








^ 


" 


1 \ 










I- 


*^dSio^ 


e*>M 


^s 


1 


'-• 


^ ^ . 




CO 


» 


\ 


i'^ 






-r 


•uonjo^xg 








j 
































qiiwq oiiqnd 


^^ 


M 






'^ 


(N»-« 


•: : 


^ 


«o 












<o 








^ 


;i 








W 1 




e^ 


1" 


: 


1 1*^ I 




•-I CO 


•ij^liing 


gj^ 


11 ^ 


cv4-< r^e^'v j 


s; 


= 


•ex 


1^ 


^ 




2 S 


•^aqija 








































'i[iire9ig 


































"^ 


•^ 


•»inw8v 


i^« 


^^ 






-.^ oc*-. 


a 


ss 


"^ 


:^eo-H 


i*^ 


t* 


s 


•uowonpqv 


















»H 




'^ 


-H 






t 






'^ 


naanraopiraqy 






























; 










i 
1 

t 
1 


5 

1^ 


2 


3 

o 




1 


§ 


1 


1 


j 


S : 

B ; 


i 


> 

i 


h 




1 


li 


.1 


a 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



333 



c; 


WOX 


8S 


s 


M^«C 


-co g^uj 


- se 


1 1^ 

CO 


^e« 


-lie J2«j5fe ^eOrH 


- s § 




'83611900 J9inO 






















•5* 
4 


'iJdqqoH 


^ec 


"* 




• • w 1 1 


! ^* 


« 




• ' jr^ 


•eo • • 


! ' 2 


5 


*^)Jddojd 
ii9I<ns 3uiA}ao»)i 


W — 


rs 


: : 


: : '^ : : 


: '^ 


^ 


: : 




l»H ; j'^ 


. N « 




adBH 




'^ 








'^ 


ii 






' '^ 


o 


'Xmpdj 






















•Jdpjnji 






'^ '. 




: ^ 


'^ 


w 






i r 


1 








\ i 


'. '. '^ '. ', 


: '^ 


'^ 




1 1 r4C< 




j « •* 


1 


*ja)i|9u«|vu«|{ 


^f-i 


w 


;i 






M 

s 






N« ^ ; 


• le t« 


*& 


Wad'inaoMq 


•oco 


S 


1- 


'.w< mM^ 


i ^ 


^r-l 


|CI W"* 


: : i'* 


: S ^ 




'imuS 'inaarei 


•o« 


s 


J ;e^ 


1 |- 1 1 


i *** 


S 




1^ CO-H^C4 C4 I 


: S S 


1 


'Ayadoid (n ^m(^ 


•^ 


•-• 


: : 


• I '^ I ( 


i "* 


m 




J ; ;*^ 


iH • • • 


: « .^ 


1 


*3ii|uxvO 






n 


• • w • 


i *^ 


(N 




• ^ tH • 


f4^ I '* 


! i "* • 


*ijd8joj 












M 


: : 


'r^ • ' 




• fH ^ 


1 


iioiiJ<nxa 












IN 






^co • • 


I •* ^ 


1 


inrnq ^oiiqnd 


c«cs 


^ 




^ . ^ . . 


i **• 


r 


ij 


F-l • ' > 


io»o I 1 


;-• S S 


J 








1 n 






IN 


: 






! *"* 1 ^ 


1 


'Xi«l8jns 


0000 


«D 


• * 


jw j» Jw 


: S 


5 




' ' tOr^ 


• v-i IfH 


i "1*^ 


1 


•-^aqija 






: : 






. 


J J 






1 ill 


'imcSfS 












. 


Ml 






ii :| i 


1 


•^inwsv 


lb. 


r* 




t 1 eo^C4 


^ «* 


V 


n 


I j ^00<DC» \r^ 


i s n 


•nonanpqv 


tH 


^ 


: : 


It i*^ ; 


: '^ 


M 




• • fH ' 




• '^ II ** 


1 




















I i '^ ' 


i "^ 


1 
i 

65 


i 
1 
1 
1 


i 


J 


1 H 

i 


M Ml 

on S2^ 


ii 


i 

1 

1 


■p. 


i 


^5* : ! 

11 ii 


i ^?' 
ill 



Digitized by 



Google 



334 



The Immigraticm Commission. 





•mox 


8S8SS sssisa 


'gag 


»9 i:s«:gs stsP 


Zto S!:| 


35? S 






5; 


*886aa0O laq^o 




• CO • • 




fH .^ 


,r^ * I 


) • 1 fH • 


.^ r^ i( 


s I 


2 > a 


>-1 


•^dqqoH 




'if* • '* 


»^ I 


1 fHi^eo 


eo I «^ I 


• o-* II 


eo I »-*-H 




;• j- S 


f 






<mi ' «H 


.^ 1^ <D^iO 


-H I I-< 


I« I I I- 


N^ I^eoe* eojj I 


I « 




*9dtlH 


«H • 




t*^ 


« !•♦ 




I^,H ^ Ir4^e« I I 


•/ i 


M I 


: ^ 


*£m{i9j_ 


















I 


'. ^ 




•japjnw 


: : 


'.'^ '. '. 




i'^ i 




:^-H 'r^ 






CO I 


- 


•painfiwp 


• iH 


1^ : '^ 


^ j^ I :» 


\ I fir^ 


"* i i i 


I^ fH I 


I I coco • 


S; 


1 


*ja)q9ini|SiiVK 


i'^ 


«H • • 




I JN 


• J ^ J 


it^ I ^ i^ 


I^ ^ Im I 


1 


S 

r 


•»»9d 'iCuaoJvq 


r* ••o-<*c< '•oeo'^M ;j]»o^eo^ o»eooo^^ ^loooo w^g 


S* S3 j 
52 2g— 


*? 




jjofcoi^w jj"*** o8'*g'*** S?'**S'* 23"*^;* 2^2 






\£)i8dojdo|ijn|tii 


; :"" 


: : '^ 




Ir^CO 


I I I*^ 


r* I ^ I 


I I I^^ I ^c« I 




1 

1 


*3ii)iixso 


eo J« 


CO • • 


l^d c«c«^ 


f4 I II 


0^ I»H^ 


»H I »H le 


"- «8 : 


: 3 




« 1 


M^ Joi 




<OC«t« 


I I C< I.- 


-•: -"^ 


»-«^ eo Ic 


«« I c<o>p^ 


: S 


•nopjoixa 


r^ • — 




i'^ 






"* i i'^ 






I 


I " 

: 3 


1 


miwq oiiqnd 
9q))8arB9«sdiii|J0 


i'^ 




00 jo 


P^N .-IW 


OO . «^»H-« 


• • M •€ 


^c -»g J 


i" 


'am^mi 








I leo 




."^ I II 


I'^ I I" 


H^ 


CI • 


i • 


5" 


*Xj«iajna 


|«ooc 


^1* rHioeo«oeo g«g«o« JJ^'^^J'* *2S?3** 2*^*^2 SS*^ 


; 5 


s 


'£j9q\2Q 


: i*^ 






'^ I I 




I I I ^ I 






d • 


I ** 


i 


•imitfia 








r^ '^ 


II 11^ 


' I i II 






Ot J 


• lO 


ninwsv 


^wow* e«^o«*M C4c«gc<^ ^cocogio «*.^'*'*oo •ou>»'« oo» .^ 


4 00 

: 2 


1 


fioRonpqv 








^ .^ 




.00 • . . 


. . . .C 


; ^"* J 


! 

5 


•^iiatiiaopiraqy 


: :- 


'II I 


• ct 


'^ * I 


r-l I I jc 


1^ . . ,^ 


• • J • 




■* J 


. p 




1 

H 
CO 


t 


111 


nil; 


III 


i : i 

\ I : I 

I'il 


liii 

11 ill 


• ' > • i 
11®:: 
' • • II 

HI H 


« i ^ i 

ill 5? 


il 




II 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



335 



I 



4 



I 



€ 



I 
I 



1 



1 



S^ 



CO 

H 

•J 

m 

f5 



ll 


•pnox 


eo 


1^ 


"^ 


00 


" 


ss 


•o 


§ 


^Mf^ 


e^ 




s 




r^ 


•9ITOI9J 




«^ 




.ioe4 . 


^ 




: :*^ : : 


*oi»JI 


CO 


^ : 




•S8« 


a 


r-tr^ 


e^r^g^^^ 


•s 

i 

1 
1 


3 


iwjox 


■"w 




>o 


"SSS- 


Q fHl^iH 


^ 


3- I 


•eimno^ 




Wr^ 


eo 




: - : : 




: '. ', 


•o|«JI 


c< 


f4 ; 


6« 


"US" 


S| 


r^w* 


^ 


Z^ : 


It 


IB^ox 




II 


f-« 


^ 






'^ : 






•H 






«H 




•ai^uraj 




II 


•^ 


^ 








: 














•9I«W 














w* . 


- 




^ 










14 


•mox 




II 








eoN . 


-II 






II 




w 




•oi«iiraj 












', '. ', 


••1 




; 


II 








•9I«W 1 












eoe* : 


•o 










04 




im 


'mojL 1 




"^ : 


'^ 




«« . 


t« 


r^ . 






1^ 




•oiBuiaj 




II : : 


; 




: : : 




: : 


II 




', 




•9IBH 1 




-^ : 


•H 




tac^ J 


r* 


^ : 






t^ 




ill 


iwiox 1 




'^ : 


r4 




rHC* • 


CO 










CO 




•eiBuiaj 1 






; 




















•aiBw 




'^ : 


-^ 




^N • 


eo 






II 




CO 




1 


•l«Jox 1 


^ 








•^232^ 


s 


■^ 




II " 


S5^ : 


•eiBmoj 


: 








: : : : 




'^ 








•91BW 1 


'^ 






; 


-^32^ 


s 








^ 


^^ : 


^1 


•l^ox 1 




II 








dM . 


■* 












>o 




•9IBUI0j£ j 




II 




; 




I '. ', 


















•QIBW 1 




II 








C^C^ ; 


^11 






II 




-3 




H 


•mox 


^ 


II "; 


(N II C3 


»H« • 


(D 














•oiBuiaj 




c« • 


^11 : : : : 


: 














•91«W 


r^ 








1 ci^eo ; 


o 1 












• 


ll 


•mox 


; 








1 




^ . 


^ 










'^ 




•oiBuraj 


: 








1 




: : 
















•ai^K 




II 






1 




^ : 


'^ 










^ 




1 

r 


•^1 


•mox 




II 






1 










II 
















•ojBraaj 










1 










II 
















•9IBW 1 










1 








"T 


II 
















1 


•mox 










•^s 


§5 : 


II 








^» 




•0|vni9j 




It 






•nc* : 


lO 


II 












*oi«H 




II 






II '^^^ : 


n 


II 








.-<o> 




1 


1»J0X 


'^ 


II "; 


w 


ll ^^22*^ 


s? 


II 


'^ .' 


"^ 


§ 


»H 


•anraraj : || -^ : 


l-ll :^ : : 

1 ll 


mi 
l-ll 






r^~ 


8" 


- 




1 

o 




\ 

: 

I 

; 

J 

1 




1 

i 


i 




•4 




1 

a 


3 


4 

1 

4 


1 


> 

i 


> 

t 
I 

i 


s 

j 

1 
5 


1 

1 
1 


> 

] 

1 


i 

9 

1 
1 

1 



Si 
55 



H 



Digitized by 



Google 



836 



Ihe Immigration Commissicm. 



^ 
^ 






> 



I 



^1 






^ 






91 

CO 

H 

•J 
A 

-< 



i 


rnox 


^ 


B"" 


"«• 


w^ 


S5 


g 


r* 


« 


»- 


£^ 


1- 


^'"•' 


9 


r 


.- 


« 


eo 




•arraiaj 


: : : : : : : : 


r^^ 


»H ; |-H J 


c^ 


II ■ • 






•91«Jl 


^jjD-i^^ ct^a 


r 


-"-82^ 


9 


\- 


« CO 




1 
■s 

i 

o 

i 




•pnox 


Og^^^ M>-4C4 


gco 


^ 


^•o^ 


21 


•^ 


wi w 




•oirorej 








i'^ : 


'^ 


II 




: ; 




•e|«w 


W3g^^^ W-HCJ 


g« 


•^ 


^"♦^ 


5 




•^ 


^ CM 




11 


mox 




«D 










'^ 


oo : 






: : I 


: 


II 


•-I 


« ^ 


1 


•DIBuraj 






















'. '. *. 




II 






1 


•apw 




«> 










^ 


^ : 










II 


'^ 


« ^ 


1 


hi 


•wox 


^■* 




^ 




•^ 


9 : 






^ : : 


^ 


II 








1 


•9IBUI9J : : 
















'. '. '. 












i 


•aiBw '^^ 




^ 




•^ 


o» • 


II 




^ : : 


-^ 










11 


m 


Wox 




2 












8 : 


II 




:^ : 


'^ 










I 


•aiBuia^ 


















II 






; 










i 


•91BW 




S 












$ ■■ 


II 




r*^ : 


'^ 










1 


ill 


iwjox 




«o 




iH ^ 


'^ 


a : 






N 


: 


w 








-u 


•oiwiraj 








: : 














; 








:;i 


•9I«H 


1 








•^ 


2' ■ 






w 




C4 








"il 


1 


•mox 


-5 


.^e« -^^* 


s-ii - 


-3N^ 


o» 










1 


•opniraj 


: ; : : : i 


: :|| : 






II 








n 


•9IBJI 


^ 


3" 


.^C» .H,-*® 


15 


M ^ 


iCM-* 


o> 


II 








'1 


4| 


•Wox 


iH 










w 


t-i 






r^ • 


^ 


II 








J 


•»iTOi9i: 














:|| 






: : 




1 










•91BW 


^3 










C4 


g}'^ II 






'•* : 


^ 


1 










Ii 


•mox 


-:3- 








^ 


S5 : 


II 




-^f-l • 


M 


1 










•9IBni9J 














II 




.'•^ : 


'^ 


1 










•9t«W 


^a- 








'^ 


^ : 






'^ 




'^ 


1 










H 


•!«JOX 


>^.-i 












<o . 






o 




N 


1 










•»!wni9j 


























1 










•oi«K 




















M 




<N 


II 








11 


1 

r 


4 


•mox 
















•^ : 










: 


II 








II 


•eiBiiraj 




























II 








n 


•9I«R 




'^ 












^ . 












|l 








if 


1 


•iwjox 


^a 








^"^ 


S^ 


11 - 


»^ 




00 


II 






-II 


•oiTOiaj 












:^ll -^ 






'^ 








:|| 


•9IBJI 


''a 








-H^ 




-II 




»»• 




»» 








-II 


1 


•iwiox 


'^S 








Meo 


"II 


^•ooeo 


2 


II -: 


t-» ; 


I 


•9i«ra9j 


: : 








: : 1 - : 11 


: : : ; 




II : : 




1 


•9IBW 


^S 








c,« 1 j^. ii 


.-itoa»eo 


00 


1 -: 


'^ 


!! 




• 




1 




•c 
! ^ 

il 

ii 

if 

If 
U 


T 

I 

IS 

1 


1 

Ii 

i] 

0. 


1 
t 

c 

1 

> 

1 

c 

i 

= 

1 

( 


• 

: 

: 

'. 

'• 
: 

1 
i 

1 




i 

< 

c 




c 


-1 


j 


• 




] 

H 


n 




1 

1 

it 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



337 




Digitized by 



Google 



338 



The Immigration G>mmission. 



.? 



i 



O 



I 
I 

Ix. 

Is 






1 



"8 

8 



t 

S 



©1 



< 



r 


•mox 


MM 


•0 


r 




■^ 


» 


r 




^ 


= 


r 


« 


'^ 


ss 


!"■ 


•aiBiroj : : 


: II -• : : 


-^ II : : : 


: II i*^ : 


■«ll ::: 


•0|«H 


COM 


»6 


1 




" ci 


A^^ 


'^ 


-a- 


"2 


1 


1 

1 

1 


1 


•l^ox 


^r-* 


C4 


11 


*:4*H 


w 


1 lO,^^ 


t« 


^00 ; 

• 


II •'•': 


•9I«ma,4 : : 




II 


: : 1 : II : : : 


: 


II i-^ : 


- II : : : 


•afBw '^'^ 


■ N 




-r 


.O^r-4 


k^ 


II --: 


00 


II "" : 


II 


iwiox 














-^ 




^ 










•aiHiuoj 














; 




: 










•aiew 










; 




•-I 




'^ 










1^1 


•|Blox 










•^ 


-• 










II 


^ : 


^ 


ll l'^ I 


•aiBuieji 1 






II 




: 










: 


II 


^ : 


^ 




•aiBjv 








II 




^ 


-• 








; 


1 








H "^ ' 


fill 


•I«JOx 
























1 










•aiBina^i 






















: 


II 










•ai«H 












; 










', 


II 










li| 


TB^OJ, 










'^ : 


"^ 


- 




i-ii 










•©IBuiaj 










: : 




: 




: 


II 










•0|«W 










1^ ; 


'^ 


1 ^ 




'^ 


n 








II : : : 


1 


•WOj, 
















•^ 




"^ 


II -^l 


3 II :^ r 


•0ITOI9J 








II 








: 






II : : : 




•oi«K 








11 








•^ 




f-i 


-^0 : 


- II :^ : 


6^ 


•mox 








II 










r-H ; 


'^ 




W ; 


e* 11 ^ : ; 


'9\vaid^ 








II 
















: : 




•9I«W 1 






II 








II 


^ : 


'^ 




C« ; 


a » ^11 


^i 

oi 


•I^ox 1 


■^ 


'^ 


II 








•^ 




•^ 




CO ' 


« 11 ; J ; 


•aiBtudi I 




: 






















•9|«W 


^ 


^ 










'^ 




•^ 




eo ; 


"II i:: 


w3 


•iBiox '^ : 


^ 










^ 


'^ 


c« 


1 


N : 


"^11 : : : 


•eiBiuo^i : : 












11 : 


:| : 


: ; 


: II : : : 


•aicw ^ : 


'^ 










II ^ 


-|« 


M ; 


1 " 11 : : : 


1 
1 

1 


5I 
•0 


•I«)Ox 














II 
















II : : : 


•0IBUI9J 1 




1~: 








1 : 


II 
















1! : : : 


•aiBFI 1 




II 






1 : 


II 
















11 : : : 


i 

^5 


•moj. "- 


CO 


1 








1 -^ 




'^ 




'^ : 


'1 r- 


•oiBuiaj : : 




1 








1 : 








^ : 


-1 : : : 


•eiBW 1 "-^ 


"1! 








1 " 




•^ 




c4 • 


"II r- 




•IBlox i 






11 -^ 




-11 " 




■ ^^ 




o»^ 


2|| ««: 


•d|!uiw^.r 1 






II -" 




1 -- II : 




:|l 


^ . 1 ^ 


II : : : 


^ 


•OIBW 1 




; 


11 
II 






1 i 


ll " 




ni 


"-r 


II "" : 









E 

c 


i 


3 


t 

c 

c 
c 

0! 

c 

1 

J 


1 


I 
1 

1 




.. * 

a.* 
S 


T 

s 

T 
C 

,1 

CB 
Pi 




3 

i 
pj 




> 

1 





3 

CO 

1 

1 




Robbery: 

Attempted robbery, first 

Robbery, first 

Robbery, first (§econd ofTense) 



Digitized by 



Google 



Geaeral Tables. 



339 



»4«* 


M 55^ 


1- 


_ 


: : 


: ; : 


:lis: 


^«6 


M 55^ 


1^. 

H r-l 


j« 


: **> : 


- i 


: : 




: IS 


:^ 


: * : 


" § 






: S 




I ', I 


: '^ 






: ^ 




: ^ : 


' $ 










: ^ : 


:I5 


:-^ 


: "^ : 


: 5? 


: : 


'. ', '. 




:'^ 


: "* : 


: 1$ 


: : 




: IJi? 


; ; 


I I '. 








t Ie3 


'.'^ 


. 00 ; 


^ 1 


: : 


: : : 


: 1 *^ 


'.'^ 




^ g 




'. '^ '. 


: 1^ 








: 1 






: '^ : 


: S 








I 2^ 




:. : 




: * 1 






: 3 








: 1^ 








: 1*^ 






:|I8 






:||-" 












: '^ 


^^ 


^ >0 ; 


ills 


: : :| : : 


:lli!3 


p: 


:•«« 


.U5 


; S*^ 


"U 






: : : : ^ 




:*^ 


. 0-4^ 1 




iJ 


Robbery, second, and petit larceny 

Total 

Taking unlawful fee 


i 

> 





Digitized by 



Google 



340 



The Immigration Commission* 



t 






^ 



8 

I 



SI 

II 
fl 



^ Oi 



5» 



f 



• 

CO 

H 

•J 
A 

< 



3 

s 

1 

o 


WOX 


S2 


a- 


S 


r 


^ 


ag 


i " 


SS" 


Tl "' 


■o 


••praraj 




•O.M 


e 


n - 


.e» 'CO • ; 


-r 


-1 li 


! 


•©1»JI 


3 


r<. 


t^ 


r i 


s^ -gs- 


i - 


1" 


•o 


it 


IB^ox 




^ 


'^ 




:^ : 




CI ^ 


:ll : : 


: 


••isuraj 


"^ 


•"1 


: 


:^ : 




-^ rH 


: : : 




•9IBH 




: 




1"^ : 




'^ 1 


:ll : : 


: 


j 


1 


•WOX 2 




-^ r^ ^ 


*5 -S-^- 


s - 


"II -^^ 


1 


••l^raaj -^ 


-^ 


« : '^ 


.» .^ . . 


■* 1 


■.i : : 


i 


•aiBK * *^ 


CO ^ . 


«S -S*^-" 


sir 


« M<S 


' 


It 


•iBiox 1 : : 








i'* : 




-^ 




'■1 


■erBuiaj 1 : : 








I : ; 








:|| 


•9IBH : : 








1 i'^ ' 


: : : 


'^ 




■ i 


14 


mox : -^ 


'^ 1 




r^^ • 


nr^ ; 


■ o 




"'i 


•eiBraaj : : 


: 




I ; '. 




: 




: 


•ai^H :|l '" 


^ 






CO-^ ; 


•II 


: — : 


"1 


m 


•i«;ox : II : 








^' : : 




^ 


: B : : 


•' 


•9i«uiaj : II : 








; : '. 






: IL : : 


= 1 


•9i«w : II : 








^ : ; 


^ * 


« r 


: n : : 


:|| 


u 


•|«;ox ^ II : 








1 i'^ : 








:|| : 










'^ : : 


'^ 1 






-^11 : 








• ^ • 


CO ; • 


■* 






£ 


mox : 










1 :^ : 


'> '. I 


C4 






•91BUI9J : 


; 








:"^ : 


'. I ', 


•"II 




• 


•8i«w : 








i'^ : 




-"11 






1 


mox : : 








I"* 


CO ; • 


"^ II ' 






•9iBraa^ : : 








; ! : 




:|l ; 






•9niH : : 










«o . . 


Ml : 






Hi 


*I«lox ^ 












'^ : : 


-11 : 






















:|| ■ 






N 










: : : 


'^ : : 


-II . 






m 


mox '^ 










-S : 


3^ : 


S||. 






•9iBraaj : 










'. I I 


'. I ', 


:ll 






•epBH 


M 










« '^f *^ 


s^ : 


"11 • 






l-tOQ 


WOX 




r^ 


-II 




II -^ \ 


t»-H t 


^W: 






•aimtraj 




: 


:|| 




II ."^ : 


I : : 




:|| : : 




•9l«W 




«H 


•^11 




^P; : 


t-»H • 


^ : 


:|| : : 


: 


1 


IB^ox 


'^ 


^ 


-^ 1 




^■* -<2;^ : 


?3 • 


: II : : 


: 


•9iBtiiaj 


'^ 


^ 


'^ 




: : : : : : 




:|| : : 




•91BJI 


'. 








^^ ^'•M . 


8 : 


:|| : : 


; 


^1 


•mox 


N 


'^ J 


^ 




:a : 


"* : : 


•O »^ 


ill r 


" 


•9IBUI9J 










: ; : 






:il : : 


: 


•91BK 


(N 




0^ 




tp^ 


"* : : 


2 - 


HI r 


^ ' 


i 


•mox 


: 1 : 




II 




: 




CO '^ 


^ 


; :^ 


« 


9iBra9ji 








II 












• I I 




•aiBH 


; ; 




II 




II : 




CO ;^ 




'C9 


■ci— 




•i«iox '^ 1 : 




r -^11 r ! 


O ; ; 


o 


"i : : 


; 


•9IBIII9J 1 : 1 : 




II 


•^ 


II :-* : 




'^ 


: II : : 


• 


•ai^wl " i 




r 




II :•- •: 


W3 • . 


-i: 


--W M 




1^ 


j^ojj 1 : : 




1 




II : 






: 1 : 


^11 : : 


:|l 


•aiiBraaj | 


1 : 




1 




II : 






: 1 : 


:|| : : 


=i 


"- 1 -aiBK ' : 


1 : 




1 




II : 






: 1 : 


-II : : 


J 




' 




J 

J 


• c 

III 

r 




4 


-i 


•T 

: c 

«a a 


1 : 


■■il 
ill 

m 

<<< 


'. « 


Bigamy 

Bribery: 

Attempted bribery 

Bribery 


i 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables* 341 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



342 



The Immigration Commission. 




Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



343 




Digitized by 



Google 



344 



The Immigration Commission. 



■^ 






o 
O 



s 



I 



s I 



1 

C3 



■8 



\ 

CO 
H 

n 

< 



o 


•nnox 




a 


M 


"^ 


r 


1^ 


s-^ 


fi4 


» f« 


c« 


S««-|g 


ii 


•aiBuraj : ^ : : | ^ 


'.'.'. '. I ', ! 


* • 


:=!IS 


^ g « ^ 


1" 


»^«^ ^o» ^ w 




tt 
II 


mox 










1 : 


1 '^ : 






: ^ 


<N ; 


: :lli3 


•eiBiaaj 
•aitJH" 












: : 










: :ll- 












"^ : 






: ^ 


CI . 


: :lia 




1 


mox 




a " : 


n 


Mt- 




M ^ . 


=—"111 


•aiBinaj 




"" : : 


^ 


: : 




I I ! 


: : : MIS 


'BVBJi 




S '^ : 


?5 


c«t« 




m ^ . 


5 li§ 


III 


IB^ox 




M 
















: : I* 


aiBuiaj 






















; : '^ 


•ai«K 




C^ 




c< 














. . QO 


arcraaj 




-- 




'^ 














: : S 
























•aiBW 




'■' 




^ 














: ^ 


ill 


mox 














'^ 








'^ : 


: : S 


•ui^maj 
•aiBH 
























w 














"^ 








"^ : 


. . „ 


II 


mojL 
























: MIS 


•ai^inaj 
























• . «^ 


•ajBH 










: 














: : 3 




« 




-"11 












: : S 


•ai«iuaj 
•aiBH 








:|| 












: "^ 




•^ 




-II 












. . 00 


1 












:|| 












. . t^ 










: II 












: :|l<^ 


•aiBW 










: 1 












: :li:s 


! 


a 


•mojj 










: 1 












: :ii22 


•dfBraaj 
•arew' 










:|l 












: :i;'^ 






♦ 
















: * IIS 


►H *^ 


mox 




•O 




•6 


6ie< 










iiBS 


■eisraaj 








1 : 


: ; 








: : 


: :|- 


•»l»H 




w» 




us 


WW 








"* : 


mi 


! 


1^ 

Is 


•mox 




CO 




eo 




"* 








t-i»-« 


::ils 




•aiBraaj 








: 














; ■\'^ 


•aiT?w 




CO 




CO 


1 
1 


'e^~ 








^« 


: : la 




1 


Wox 
•aiBinaj 




'^ 






: '^ : 


CO ;- 


' :II9 




















: : 


: :flS 




•arBH 




'^ 




» 




e* 




: ^ : 


eo :- 


' :||!5 




£| 


•mox 




» 






^ 




■^ 




« : 


riis 




•arraiaj 




'^ 




'^ 




: 










: :ll» 




00 




00 




'^ 




"^ 




(N : 


r\t 


1 


mojj 




'^ 




^ 














Z3 


•oiTOiaj 








; 
















•aiBH 




wt 




^ 














' '■ 1:5 


11 


Wox 




04 




w 














r f 




•airnuaj 








:|l 












: :ir 




•ei«K 




e« 




^11 












riis 




11 


_WOX 
•oi«raaj 






eo 


r,,, 












: :II5 










:ll 












: :ir 








w 


cop 












: :|[S 






' 




1 
lit 


o 

01 

1 


a 
o 

y 

J 5 
c 


i 

IS 
if 


i 


1 

1 


II 


1: 


Is 

11^ 


i; 
II 

•o : 

s ; 
|i 


: :g 

ill 


111 

> 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



845 



Tabls 88. — Persons convicted, by offense and by country of birth: New York county 
and supreme courts, January 1, 1907, to December 31, 1908. 

BxvBBD cuLsamcAnoiT OF orrsMua. 

IComplled from reports made to the secretary of state, by the New York comi^ and supreme courti 
(mipablished). This table does not include 3 corporation^.] 





United 
States. 


roMucm. 


1 


i 




Oflenae. 




1 

3 


1 


►» 


1 


1 




i 


1^ 


i 


Gainful offenses: 

Burglary 


2,181 

16 

221 

3,009 
238 


72 
2 
9 

191 
6 


24 


30 


138 

1 
17 

202 
7 


60 
8 
8 

128 
8 


125 

36 

7 

238 

89 


27 

"i' 

31 
4 


156 
1 
17 

313 
11 


91 
10 
12 

181 
8 


718 
83 
76 

1,414 
84 


100 

1 
13 

90 
18 


2,999 


Extortion 


70 


Forxery and firandolent offenses. 

Larceny and receiving stolen 

DroDorty. 


5 

52 

4 


5 

78 
2 


310 
4,518 


Bobbery 


340 






Total 


5,666 


280 


85 


115 


360 


197 


445 


63 


498 


302 


2,345 


222 


8,233 






Ofltonses of personal violence: 

Abdocoon and kidnaping 

Assault 

Homicide. , 


87 
630 

72 

1 

115 


2 
62 

7 

1 
6 


ih' 


1 
8 
2 


1 

47 
8 


'38* 
6 


24 

342 

74 


'i4* 
2 


3 
73 
5 


5 
64 
6 


36 

663 

110 

1 

63 


1 

40 
8 

io* 


74 

1,333 

190 


Ifafmtpr. 


2 


Rape. 


1 


2 


11 


2 


25 


1 


3 


12 


188 






Total 


855 


78 


16 


13 


67 


46 


465 


17 


84 


87 


873 


59 


1,787 


Offenses agahist public policy: 
Crimes against public health and 
9afMy 


127 
263 
39 


15 
2 
10 

4 


1 

is' 


8 
4 

10 


13 
11 
27 
3 


3 
3 
15 
3 


163 
12 
58 
11 


5 

1 
3 
2 


15 
4 

9 
7 


11 
12 
23 
9 


229 
49 

168 
30 


1 

1 

149 

9 


310 


Oaming 


177 


Violations excise laws, eto 

AflothfT . 


580 
87 










TotaL 


509 


31 


14 


17 


54 


24 


244 


11 


85 


56 


485 


160 


1,154 






Binmy. 


65 
25 

81 
14 


8 


.... 


4 

4 

8 





2 


6 
2 

3 
2 


2 


8 


1 
3 

2 

1 


40 
9 

12 
11 


6 
1 

6 
8 


111 


cHme against nature 

Disorderly house, obscene prints . 
eto 


35 


"2 


1 


2 
2 


1 






49 


All other 




4 


28 










Total 


185 


10 


1 


11 


13 


8 


13 


2 


12 


7 


72 


16 


223 


TTnfflaffffiAed offenses 


122 


"20" 


T 


"T 


20 


~r 


16 


8 


17 


7 


104 


IT 


243 






Total defined offenses . . ....... 


7,286 
834 


419 
68 


124 
6 


161 
23 


514 
41 


^S 


1,183 
101 


96 


G46 
72 


458 
62 


3,879 
415 


474 
6 


11,639 


Offenses net defined 


1,255 






Grand total 


8,120 


472 


130 


184 


555 


345 


1,284 


96 


718 


510 


4,294 


480 


12.894 







79840**— VOL 86— U— .-as 



Digitized by 



Google 



346 



The Immigration Commissicn. 



I 



•3 



I 



■a 
8 



I 
1 

a* 
St 



I 



^ 

tf 



I 



1 



I 



<§ 



CO 
H 

n 



I 

8 






il 

I i 

d 8 



I 

I 

I 

o 



I 
I 

t 
6 



Tn<n pnwD 



-po^jodai )0|{ 



d 



•Wox 



-joj jaqio 



■PI 1S9M 



•iCa^jnx 



•pirei 

-J9HiA8 



*II9p9A8 



•piretioos 



•wsstiH 



'V}uvuiUOH 



•pireioj 



*^«MJO>I 



•^I«II 



*pa«i9Ji 



•pirenon 



*oooejo 



*i[mmj»0 



'aooBjj 



'pnviSns 



*j(jtraiiiaci 



•«qno 



•«anio 



•«pBireo 






•sa'ms poiian 



o 



«t-i cDeo 



^a» «j5 



(OC4 COC« 



S3 sz 



IBS |3 



rHiHW» Ok^ 



g?* ss 



«w^ • 'fH 



tO^M 0»»0 



gMW ggO 



COC0C4 tC^ 



*QC«-H OO 



sga gs 



SRSSSIR 



w»^oooooe-« 



9 «-lv4 



9!ggSSSr 



<i«iMC«M«0»H 



ocoeoioeo^eo 



'agsag 



oii-ir^^^'^^ 



• ©•^ .«-< 



C<>-4 00C«C«C4C9 



•O •i-l^fM 



o«gb 



SJogR^g* 




o.d'oS 






" 



3 



- 



mum I 



a-< <^ 



§ 



s«*< 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



347 





i 5= 


s 


1 


i 


j 


1 

C 


: 


«8^«g «« 


§ 


R» 


§ 


S2s?e| 8$ 


i 








8*"SB 


Ok 


!2 


2* 


8 




»* ■ 


S4 




S^ 


5« 


!«: 




jeo 


•o 


e« 


o 


•o • 


«o 




c«^^t» 




FS 


8^ 


g 




00 


«^ 


-* 


S 


I3« 


^ 




2 


^a» ^^ 


^ 


5-* 


5 


«S-^^| ^s 


1 


|S 


g 




-* 


«t* |»H 


::: 


2« 


2 




s; 


^2 eoc; 


2 


S j 


S 




w 


^t* ■ • 


8 


8^ 


S 


-'^g^l -'SSI 


» 
^ 


g§ 


! 


«s««5 «s 


s 


gfe 


i 




^ |»H»0 ^ 1 


CO 


a»c« 


3 




o^ jr^ • ; 


00 


35 "^ 


n 


^S^J:35 «2 


§ 


s- 


§ 




^^^»o j»H 


s 


s§* 


5 




^ 


•Oj* *-»"* 


«r 


§^ 


S 




fO 




«o 




w 


«« 


2 










•o 




•o 


00« 


2 










^ 




- 


2« 


3 


^S 


-DCJ 


"* 


s 




§ 


MMWOjg «0t«. 


i 


'" 


s 


IP 

2,181 

16 

221 

2,710 

40 
299 


1 


Si 




S 


1 


11 

)9! 


1 

T 

: 


is 

ii 

1 

it 


1 


.J 


1 

•0 


i 
1 

o 







Digitized by 



Google 



848 



The Immigration Commissioo. 







TUOjpinuo 


8SS5^ 


'" § 


^^ 


eto c«e«eo9 i-«^^ 


^i s 


sg« 


§8 


1 3 


•peModanoM 


M^eo 


i i *^ 


* I 


j^ M 1 


: : i :' 


■^p s 


*^ :gl«* 


5" 1 


£ 


•mox 


ebior«e 


' i s 


^ '. 


8« : : 


i-«g i-«»He 


'6 2 


a2«gS5 


R ^ 


•n«ia«VJwno 


• iH ! 


! ! ^ 




eoi-« 1 1 


|c« 1 ji- 


■** s 


: i : 


^ : 


1 1 


•WFPniVWM 












: i : i : = 


•0 I 


^ 1 


•poBijeKiiMs 




: ? : 






w* \ • ! 


•^ « : : 


,w^ 


;i 


•nepaiiS 


: :^ 


: : ^ 






I^ I \r 


•tr^ CO "^ ; i 




table doM 


•pOTl^oog 




i i : 






• • * * 


: i : i : 


M \ 


•Bisena 


* i i* 


« 1 r« 




* ' i * 


!iH IiH 


|eo a» r«« ; 


a* 


1 ^ 


•POBIOJ 


: : i 






*• i i i 


IiH I I 


;^ lO J ; ; 


* : 


s ^ 


•-^I 


«o^c% 


i i *^ 




^ : i ! 


I^ t ! 


is S -»»- i 


S8 


I 1 

1 1 

1 ^ 


•pireiwi 


C% Ii-« 


i i "^ 


^ : 


'^ : : : 


■ eo • I 


.00 g « ; : 


a* 


*^iremi»D 


to \c% 


i i •* 




eo^ i i 


JM i-« J 


js a 


r^ .fH 


s* 


-aotnjj 


• •H 1 


: : ^ 




: : : I 


M i I 


: : i 


i i i 


i-«»4 


"ti 1 


•pirei3na 


■*N^ 


I I r« 




^ : : : 


*«H '• *• 


jio »« 


« : : 


CO • 


;^ 1 


tnwTOO 


i : \ 


! \ \ 




: i : : 




• a o» 


« j^ 


* • 


bvrOi: New 
k ooonty and i 


-nnH-«wrov 


CO J I 


i i ** 




-* • ; • 


• • • (Vi 


■<is. ej 


•Oi-« 


a* 


-nms Winn 


82S5- 


-_ g 


1 '^ 


gco :« 


«8 i :« 


-s § 


1 ssa^js 


?l 
1 1 

1 1 

It 
II 

s I 

H a 
>J S 
n Q 

e3 " 






Ml' 

Hi 

1 


!l^ 




iii! 

mi 

ii 


2I 


Ii 1 


5 : : 
•8 : i 

IN 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



349 



»g$^ 



•-^aa* 



:sa 



--:j§ 



-2«" Si^S 



g55 : sg-e 



5S 



-^a 



-^85 



:S 



»^e^g 



«s« 



^8 



g •g'** s»§ss 



§§ 






^ : 



S : 



a : 



SS : 



^8 



153 



3 : 




.-1 

Pi 



, Digitized by 



Google 



350 



The Immigration Commission. 



2 I 



I 



I 






■i 



•J 
m 

e2 






f I 



1 I 



s 






I 

i 





•m<n pnwD 


2S2a 




1 — «g2 ^l^*-^ -^a 


^ u 


i 


9!; 


•o 


•poVodw^ON 


«•• JCQ 


: : - 


M 


|,H I j^H 


• • '•■^ 


-^ r: 


s 


"; 


•^ 


Ph 


•moi 


«5j*«, 


:• S 


^-^-^gS «?5 


JfH ^« 


: g 


s 


as- 


-joi jaq^o 


•r-l • 


: : ^ 


»H • 


|^C9 |.H 




2 


r^ 


••H 

• 




»Tpun»M 


: i'^ 


: : '^ 


'^ : 


•C« j j^ 






"* 


■r 




•puinJaniMS 








: : : i-^ 






- 


1 i 




•uapomg 








: : : :- 




i r4 


« 


II i 




'pms^oos 


: : i-^ 


: : -^ 




! '. ! f* 




M 


eo 


11 i 




•Bjssna 


• ^ ,' 


j^ lO 


: i" 


H iH eo • CO 


i : '.^ 


<o 


^ 


"" 




-vfovomoH 




:-* - 


• • 


• * • • • 




: : 








•pireioj 


•« 1 


I • c* 


J»H 


• « • • • 


: : - 


c« 


<D 






*X«iUOK 


: : : 










: - 


- 






•^wi 


«eo^»H 


: ! *^ 




jgo c^ 


1^ !« 


: ^ 


1 


'^S 




•pcreiwi 








•CI 1 J 1 


! I JC4 


i *^ 


«N 




'998010 






•H • 


•00 • II 




: -^ 


•O 


1 : 




'Xovmjoo 


;<o • 


|C« 00 


iH I 


:2 i '•• 




i ^ 


S 


S*^*^ 


•ooinuj 








: : : : : 












'pmiauH 


: :*"^ 


^ 




JM : •« 




' *^ 


2 


i'^ 




•«qno 








'.'^ ', I J 






-- 


1 i 




trarqo 






1 ii 


:^ i i'* 






iO 


1 i 




•«pwreo 


: : :- 


I • fH 


II ii 


i*^ ! i i 




<* 


•o 


1 - 




•XnSmiH 
-«insnv 


jio '. 


j« r* 




!^eo jc* 




• CO 


2 


C«H 




•»»«»s P»»inn 


•-8S3 


"••-» ^ 


li "^ i' 


<,g^ ->S' 


■* i i** 


i 2 


§ 


ss« 




' 


Offenses against ohastity: 

Adultery 

Bigamy... 


: : : 
: : '• 


M 

hi 


v^uuspiTttcjr 

Crimes against public health and Mrfety 

Crimes against the public peace 

Escape 

Gaming 


A^lUVl 

Lottery 

Offenses against the public Justice 

Perlurv 


Hi 


3 


Offenses against the person: 

Abandonment and other acts of oruelty to 

children 

Abduction 


i 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



351 



b" §-8| 




1 ^- 




3§ 




I 


QOvH lO |««t 


- : 55 


I-, 


: :-> is- 


'*^ S» 


S' 


3 


§ 


: S«SS 


5^ § 


SIS**' jgs 


5S 1 






^5 


• eoeoMC 


' : ?5 


ji^r* 


• :« is- 


^^ 2 


i« 


S 


M 


: : ' '-' 


H i 1«< 


J'* 


', I Itm 


: : s 


J8« 
|2» 


S 


: 




•^ 1-* 


•fH 


i i i * i® 


i : S 


« 


• J J»Hi- 


H ■ ^ 


j« 


i i i"* 


i i *® 


J2~ 


s 


j 


l * • • 


i : : 


|o» 


jf^ i*^ 


: : ^ 


a- 


» 


9 


; fH !««[ 


oc g 


wg^^o jr^c 


'« i 


1' 

1^ 


2 


^ 


: : : : 


i : ^ 


•»H 


• M jr* 


|«H .^ 


•o 


• « J |- 


N j 00 


•^ 


.^ .,.Hr< 


»• 52 


3 : 


S 


CO 


: : : : 


i i *^ 


is 


! i*^ i*' 


1 I ^ 


2" 


S) 


2 


: 5«S3 


'i 5 


-'SS 


1 i- is^ 


•a g 


§s 


g 


8 


i ** i** 


: : ^ 


i-t^W 


» •« j^f. 


^eo « 


S^ 


2 


<D 


\ ^ \ I 


I I 1^ 


jo- 


' i i i"^ 


I ! CI 


S- 


9 


c; 


; ** i*^^ 


•o 


-a- 


• is is- 


•2 § 




s 


- 


: : : •' 


1^ CO 


ji^t- 


j^ |<o 


i i "^ 


1 s* 
Iss 

1 ooct 
I ooo 


8 

S 

»-< 

2 

o 


M> 


i ^ i*^ 


• c« ^ 


|o» 


jco jcj- 


.^ g 


iH 


: ; i-^ 


' ' « 




III |«o 


1 : M5 


f^ 


• jrH 


• i 2 




. : i i- 


:« !j 


;3 


J I * ;• 


is 


. i« is 


So 


' ^ ''-^-^ 


- : 9 


^5jic^^ is* 


"^ 2 




i 


S 




r § 




es 1 




1 Hi 


P 


B i i 


i j I j jj 

ill ii" 

:§• i;3 
if: ijj 

^^ M 

til l|i 


I I \ 
.J I 


i 

1 







Digitized by 



Google 



852 



The Immigration Commission. 






I 



I 



f 

8 M 

w •a a 



f 



•S" 



CO 



J 



•jeAopiwooo'It 



•ooo'it 

J8puii pnv OJiCf 



jopoD pm 09t 



■QStJ^^a 



'^ino peag jaqoroi^ 



'peao6|id 
"Qi| pnv pong isqaiQi^ 



-iI5|iiud fnuov) poao 
•fitJidmi JO pcigp j9qniPK 



•tp wp 

0} pGoaa^oBe joqunii^ 



1 



i 

I 



*pe^odai)OM 



*93II9}1I86 ^Yl, 






'8JV9X OS TIBT(} 

ssannqsjoaXox 



'ana^oiinin 



8SQI )nq JTOA I 



t n«q» 8S91 
)iiq ffq;)izoiiz s 



*8ii}aoiii 



'pOOO^JdOI} J9^uiik|il 



•pepaedsni eooai 
-me tayiw 



Avq JoqimiM 



*pa|OfAiioo jiN(uiii|i 



82« 



»iH t>a»o^ 



S;*8S 



eoe^AM • CO 



c«a»^ • -H 



:ss 



*'^2t*^A e««DC«^ eo 



eoig •« '^ 



S|"a ^1^** t-M»g 



io«D^ ••-» McocjiHio «or2 '^ 'r^WiH « . .lo 



3*^8 



^iPMMflO ige^<Qr«i-4 S^S'^S ^^53^ -«eo»cj| 



93 



<* :«>og»«Di-« (SS^*o» iH£ococ« ^o«a»c 



;3«3«^ ggr^O. ^jO 



.H r^^vHeo '©^ ■ ^ •«»H 



555' 



|g««)C3 gggjHoo ggt^g ;3|U5« gr^gj 



S« 



gg^t^eo 3ggg •grja ^'^-SSo 



g§sss s^|S" §S^^ ^S^^ ^^^S 



s 



m 



m 



;i 



s 



ss 



I, 



§ Hill sills llilllill^li I 



•a 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



358 



•a 






I 



I 



^ 



^ I 

I I 



I 
I 



i 

3 



•jeAopwiooo'lt 



Jp OO'lt 
jopuu pnv oszt 



'OfiCt 
jopmi pm 09t 



Offfjepun 



'^lao pong joqaroi^ 



'poao6|jd 
-ini pQV pooQ J9Cinin|{ 



-iisjand [8n)ov) pevio 
-gpdpn 10 poop JBqmnK 



o) peooo^osB jaqnin^ 



•2 
S 



I 

§ 



*po;jodoi)OK 



*ooiiO)aQ8 efi^ 



S8Bi)nq8iBa^0e 



sseDnqsraoiCot 



'WbqA 01 otra) 

8881 )nq fiIB8A 9 



'£i99AqxzBm 
8SQI )nq m£ i 



•mA 

I Xrtm 888( 

)nq sq^nonz 2 



'sifiiiom 



'pooospdini JsqimiK 



'pepnedsQS eoaai 
-me lii|A«i 



▲«q JoqimiM 



*p890|Aiioo JoqinDK 



O ^MCO^ 



CO i-ia»>o^ 



s •a- 



Mt*«r* 



e>l^r-l>H too) 'lO 



! S^Or-l 



^ S'^'^'^S eS^^^^S^ Mciote 



r-l^e«i-«'« C«fl0^t« 



g-t 



U9COiOCO<D C«0» 'eOC) r-l^ 



?ss^s as'^Q'* '^•'•a 



j5-»«<og S^e^gict ««^o 



^-j^O^ 






gSSS9 S|^§3 SS^83 



assy's 8sai:« •••'^a 



SSSFSSg SS^^s »3S^ 



§p i 



gp 



I 



Jl 



-^OHI 



lilll nil 



It II 



I 



Digitized by 



Google 



854 



The Immigration Commission. 









I 



ii 

1 1 

:^ I 



J" 



^ 



I 

n 



•jaAopiwooo'Tt 



OOO'It 
jspon pcre ogj5t 



'092S 
jspoD pm ogf 



OBfwpin 



*^o P9II9 jaqomK 



*poao8{jd 
-mi pnv pong owinm^ 



'(pouodai )oa ^aooz 
-qsTund fmuaB) pooo 
•gpdaq JO poiip joqmnK 



'in«9p 
<n pwaofiaoe aoqiiznit 



i 

3 



*pO}JOdQJ )0^ 



'8009)096 ajU^ 



•9|n W8q5^ 

8891 )nq 8J«9i OC 



*8188ioeO«lO 

8891 )nq sjwX 01 



'8JQ9X 01 o«m 

B89I )nq 8JB9A 9 



'S2B9A 9 OBin 
8891 )nq JB9A T 



•j«9i£ T ovq) S89I 
)nq si^ooaz e 



*cq!(Ooai 
S o«q) 8S9q 



'P9a06|jdaif j9qaznH 



'p9po9d8n8 
90099098 yofABq J9qmn|{ 



*p999|Aaoo j9qaniK 



I 



SS 



0ȣ5 iH^NOON rHN '1-1 



9<o "^S^S^ '^S^S'* ««o«^5 



o^^g .^ 



j^OMcogi ^S'^SS* eocteog 



t* ^<Hcog 



« e«3;« 



JS«S;88 ->'--S'^ 



•OM •CQiH 'to 



gcji^wg S|S2§ SgSgS '-•SS 



s^ :«s sae-'sc •s^ss ^•^'-s 



|f:SS3 SgSgg aS228 SSSc 



p 



' 



§ 9 



I 

I 



2: 






a 



1 1 



1 tilt 



s 
§ 

sill 1 



^l«i Ellis lIsS ■ 

)>'f'a 8'SoSg li£9 o 



II 



I 

■ 



'f 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



355 



Table 40. — Previous convictions of persons convicted, by country of birth: New York 
county and supreme courts, January 1, 1907, to December SI, 1908, 



[This table does not indode 3 corporations and 323 persons not reporting complete data.] 




Country of birth. 


Total 
number 
reixntng. 


Number 

reporting 

previous 

canvictions. 


United States 


7,984 




2 445 






Anstria-Hongary 


466 
128 
14 
10 
16 

180 
44 

642 
39 
11 

339 

1,262 

29 

94 

19 
707 
44 
36 

27 
15 

47 
164 




80 


Canada. . " ' 


30 


Chin^ 




Cuba 




1 


Dounark 


4 


England r r 


41 


France -,-..- '. . 


10 


GermanT 


148 


Qreeoe 


4 


Holland 


3 


Tn4«nd 


63 


Italy 


135 


Norway 


3 


Pobmd , . . , 


33 


Rcomania. ^ r ,,,,-,,., .-.t,, .-,...,.,.. 


2 


Rosaia 


135 


R<>otland 


9 


B^v^ffl4fn ... - - 


7 


flwitfflriand . 


5 


Turkey 




West Indies 




5 


Other foreign , 


30 






Total foreign 


4,222 




748 






Notxeoorted 


362 




99 






Grand total 


12,568 


3,293 





Digitized by 



Google 



856 



The Immigration Commission, 



Tabls ^1,^-^Previoiu oonvictums of penom convicted, hy oWente: New York county 
and supreme courU, January 1, 1907, to JDecemSier 31, 1908, 

[This table does not indade 8 corporatkos tad 326 penons not raporttng complete data.] 



GihDsa. 



Total 
number 
reporting. 



convietlQiia. 



N mmber 
reporting 



Offlenses against chastity: 

Bigamy 

Grmie aninst natore 

Disordeny house 

AUothsr 

Total 

Oftenses against public policy: 

Grimes against pabUo health and safety 

Qsming 

Periury ^ 

VanoQS provisions of excise law, etc 

AH other 

Total 

Offenses against the person: 

Abandonment and other acts of cruelty to children 

Abduction 

Assault 

Homicide 

Bape 

Bobbery 

All other 

Total 

Offlansee against p rop erly: 

Arson 

Burglary 

B xtortJo n, 

Forgery 

Larceny 

ICalidoas mischief 

Receiving stolen property 

AH other 

Total 

Total deOn 
Ofiansee not deOned. 
OrandtotaL.. 



106 
35 
46 
24 



213 



304 
74 
34 
498 
150 



1,060 



106 
62 
1,283 
182 
187 
340 
39 



2,190 



34 

2,946 

70 

301 

3,909 
67 
465 

8 



7,890 



11,363 



1,206 
12,568 



11 
13 
8 
8 



27 
19 
6 
64 

7 



123 



10 
16 
262 



124 
5 



7 

1,154 

7 

86 

1,044 
12 
18S 



8,096 
197 

*T5 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



857 



Table 42.— P«r«on* convicted, by offense and by age group: New Tori county and 
iupreme cowrU^ January 1 to Veeember SI, 1907, 

[Thii table does not inolade 1 oorporatioii and 107 persons not reporting oomplets data.] 





Number within each specified age gronpb 


Total 


Oflenss. 


Under 14 
years. 


14 and 15 
years. 


10 to 20 
years. 


21 to 10 
years. 


40 years 
croTer. 


number 


OBsuses sgainst chastity i 

Bigamj ., ', 








50 
7 

14 
2 


10 
5 

10 
2 

1 


00 


CrirneB'agatnst natare 




2 


2 


10 


Disorderly houses, obscene prints, etc. . 




24 


InoQBt .. 








4 










1 














Total 




2 


2 


73 


28 


105 




''**■*'*'" 




Offenses against public poUoy: 

Bribery. ..•••....... 










1 


1 


Gomponndhig crhne 








1 
70 

1 


1 


Ofmffl ftgftinfft pvMfchml^ and safety . 






84 
2 


11 

1 

1 


124 






1 


f 






1 


Escape .". 








2 


2 


False rectotntlon 






1 


2 
20 

1 


3 


O^mliijr 






47 


07 


linrportfaur fSoicln criminals. .......... 








1 


KSenr?:.!^T.!!z!T!//.:;:::::: 








1 

7 

03 


1 








1 

2 


3 
103 


11 








106 










Total 




1 


40 


231 


143 


415 




* * * 




Oflbnses against the person: 

Abandonment and other acts of croelty 
tochUdien 








57 
20 
1 
411 
60 

4 
2 
45 
04 

4 


10 

4 
2 
01 
16 


07 


Abduction 









83 


Abortion. 






3 


AfflHHi^ , ,, 




1 


111 
12 


014 


Homioide 




87 


FMnApfng..... 






4 


va^Tfimff . . . 






1 

10 
50 

2 




3 


RMie...:.. 






14 
8 


78 


BoSbery 






147 


BnV^^ . 



















Totsl 




1 


204 


607 


140 


1,042 


Offenses against property: 

Arson 




1 
41 


2 

525 

5 


7 

520 

18 

8 

85 

1,083 

10 
02 


1 

80 
2 

1 

15 
188 

4 
17 


11 


Buniary 


2 


1,174 


eSSSS:::::"::;!:;""::":::::::: 


25 


False personations and cheats 






4 


Vcftgfrj 




1 

84 

4 
3 


33 
757 

6 

77 


134 


Larceny 


6 


i,068 


Halidous mischief and injuries to 


24 


Reoeivibkg stolen property 




180 








Total 


8 


84 


1,405 


1,818 


814 


3,620 






Total defined offenses 


8 


88 
8 


1,651 
34 


2,819 
112 


025 
00 


5,101 


Offgy^HW not df^ftjied 


ii 








Orand total 


8 


OG 


1,685 


2,031 


085 


5,405 







Digitized by 



Google 



358 



Tlie Immigration Commission. 



Table 43. — Persons convicted, hy offense and by age group: New York county and 
supreme courts^ January 1 to Vecember SI, 1908, 

[This table does not include 2 corporations and 118 persons not reporting complete data.] 





Number within each spedfled age group. 


Total 


Offense. 


Under 14 
years. 


14 and 16 
years. 


16 to 20 
years. 


21 to 30 
years. 


40 years 
or over. 


"ST 


Offenses against chastity: 

Adultery 






2 
3 
6 


6 
43 

6 
13 

4 
5 


2 
6 

7 
8 


10 


Bigamy 






51 


Crimes acrainst nature 






19 


Disonlcrly houses, obscene prints, etc. . 






21 


Incest 








4 


Seduction 






2 




7 












Total 






13 


77 
2 


22 

3 

1 
1 
12 

1 
2 
56 


112 


Offenses against public policy: 

Bribery 


- ■ = 




5 


Com])ounding crimes 








1 


Consjpirac V 








2 
112 

13 

5 

60 

1 

1 
14 

1 
141 


3 


Crimes against public health and safety 
Crimps against public peeoo ^ . . 




1 


46 

1 


170 




15 


Escape . 






7 


G ammg • 






2 


108 


Lottery 






1 


Cifitm^fi^ against the public jtisticA 










1 


Perjury 






6 


4 


33 


Unlawful practice of medicine 






1 


Various provisions of excise law, etc. . . 




3 


8 


118 


270 








Total 




4 


61 


342 


108 


006 








Offenses against the person: 

Abandonment and other acts of cruelty 
to children 








33 
14 

1 

457 

1 

62 
4 

68 

106 

4 


7 

4 

4 

99 


40 


Abduction 






11 


9 


Abortion 






5 


Assault 




3 


140 


706 


Coercion 




1 


Homicide 






21 
2 
27 
74 

1 


14 
2 

24 
6 
5 


97 


Kidnaping 






8 


Rape 






100 


RoDberv 






186 


Suicide 






10 










Total 




3 

1 
88 


285 

6 

811 

10 


740 

16 
858 

30 

2 

100 

1 
1,U5 

19 
157 


166 


1,193 








Offenses against property: 

Arson , 




2 

98 
2 

1 
29 


34 


Burglary 


1 


1,806 


Extortion 


42 


False Dersonations and cheats 






3 


Forgery 






38 


167 


Fraud .. ........ 






1 


Larceny 


1 





667 

19 
101 


172 

5 
24 


1,054 


Malicious mischief and injuries to 
property 


43 


Receiving stolen property 






2S2 


Total 


2 


48 


1,642 


2,297 


333 


4,32 


Total defined offenses 


2 
2 


65 
63 


2,001 
271 


3,466 
667 


718 
139 


6,232 




1,033 


Grand total 


4 


108 


2,272 


4.023 


857 


7.254 







Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



359 



Table 44. — Literacy of persons convicted, 6y country of birth: New York county and 
supreme courts , January 1, 1907, to December SI, 1908, 



[This table does not include 3 corporations and 351 persons not reporting complete data. Persons reported 
having attended school are included in columns 3 and 4.] 


Country of birth. 


Number 

con- 
victed. 


who read. 


Number 

who read 

and 

write. 


United States 


8,004 


7,806 


7,684 






Austfi^^HuTigary 


466 
128 

14 
9 

15 

182 
43 

550 
39 
11 

838 

30 
95 

19 

714 

44 

35 

30 
15 
47 
155 


398 
121 

11 
9 

15 

178 
41 

530 
28 
11 

329 

807 

29 

75 

15 

539 

43 

33 

80 
11 
43 
128 


396 


Canada T...'. 


121 


rh*tm 


11 


Cuba 


9 


Penroark . . . . 


15 


England .. 


177 


France 


41 


n^rn^an J . . 


527 


Greece, r 


28 


Holland 


9 


freland 


328 


Italy 


789 


Nonray 


28 


Poland. 


73 


Roomania 


15 


Russia 


532 


fU^^nri , . , 


41 


Sweden .* 


33 


SwitMrland 


30 


Turkey 


11 


West indies 


43 


OtiMT ^oreiim • , , , , 


124 






Total foreign , 


4,242 


8,424 


3,381 








297 


261 1 258 






Grand total 


12,543 


11,491 


11,323 







another foreign" includes 1 Africa, 1 Armenia, 6 Australia, 6 Belgium, 1 Brazil, 1 British Guiana, 1 Bul- 
garia, 4 Finland. 1 India. 1 Japan, 1 New Zealand, 4 Nova Scotia, 1 Philippine Islands. 6 Porto Rico, 1 
Portugal, 4 Servla, 9 South America, 7 Spain, 1 Tripoli, 8 Wales, and 90 foreign (not specified). 

Table 45. — Schooling of persons convicted, by country of birth: New York county and 
supreme courts, January 1, 1907, to December SI, 1908. 

[This table does not include 8 corporations.) 





Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
report- 

""^^ 
tog. 


Number 
report- 
ing no 
school, 
tog. 


Number reporting schooling todicated. 


Country of birth. 


Common 
or public. 


Academy 
or high. 


College. 


Other. 


Total. 


United States 


8,120 


2.468 


198 


2,135 


84 


28 


23 


2,270 


Austria-Hungary 

Canada 


472 
130 
14 
10 
15 

184 
45 

555 
39 
11 

345 

1,284 

30 

96 


118 
85 

4 


68 
7 
3 


49 

73 

1 






1 


50 


3 


2 


78 


Pfilnii. 




1 


Cuba. 












3 

36 
6 
174 
15 
3 

64 

618 

5 

79 




3 

28 

4 
149 

4 
3 

51 
159 

4 
59 








3 




4 

2 
20 
11 


4 






32 








4 




3 


2 




154 






4 


Ttt<n».nt\ 








3 


beland 


9 
456 

1 
20 


2 
2 


2 

1 




55 


TtAlv 




163 


"KnrmsL-v 




4 


Polan<L 








69 



Digitized by 



Google 



860 



The Immigration Commission. 



Tablb i^.— Schooling of persom convicted, by country of birth: New Yorl county 
and tupreme eoiarU, Jcmuaary i, 1907, to December 31, i^^— Continued. 





Nomber 

oon- 

▼loted. 


Nomber 
report- 
ing as to 
Mbool- 


Nomber 
report- 

tog. 




Country of birth. 


Common 
orpobUc. 


Academy 
or high. 


CoUege. 


Other. 


TbtaL 


Romnfini* 


19 
718 
44 
86 

80 
18 
47 
156 


4 

248 

12 

10 

8 

6 



112 


4 

176 

1 

3 












^^iffffi^ 


66 

8 

8 

1 
2 
82 


8 

2 






68 


Sootland 






u 


Sweden 






8 


ftwitffrlMid .......... 








1 




4 

4 

27 








1 


Weetlndief. 








2 


Other foreign* 


2 


1 




8S 








Total foreign 


4,2M 


1,606 


818 


767 


21 


8 


1 


787 


Not reported 


480 


281 


86 


229 


8 


7 


1 


3ff 






Grand total 


12,884 


4,864 


1,062 


3,121 


118 


43 


26 


1.308 



• "Other foreign" Inohides 1 i 



.1 Armenia, 6 Ao 



Belgiom, 1 Bnxfl, 1 British Ouiana, 1 Bid- 
>tia, 1 Philippine Islands, 6 Porto Bioo, 1 
8, and 90 foreign (not specofied). 



_ __ lAJrica,] 
nrla, 4 Fto]and7l India, 1 Japan, INew Zealand, 4 Nova 
Fortogal, 4 8ervla, Booth Amerioa, 7 Spato, 1 Tripoli, 8 Wake, 

Table M*— Literacy of persons convicted, by country of birth: New York county and 
tupreme courts, Januaiy 1 to December SI, 1907, 

[This table does not indnde 1 corporatton and 146 persons not reporting complete data. Persons reporting 
having attended school are indoded in columns 3 and 4.] 



Country of birth. 


Number 

con- 

Tfoted. 


Nomber 
who 


Nomber 
who read 
andwrita 


United Btatee 


8,4B2 


8,872 


8,8» 




Aofltria-Hongary 


183 
82 
70 
19 

228 

168 
618 

38 
803 

18 

22 
14 
24 
97 


163 
49 
68 
18 

228 

166 
336 

30 

286 

18 

22 
14 
23 
81 


161 


Caoada .'...' , , . , . , » 


49 


FnglMfH 


68 


France. ...X... ^.. . .. . . 


18 


GermanT ... 


230 


Inland 


16t 


Italy 


334 


P(>1ftn(f _ . , . 


28 


HnsMft ....,,.. 


2M 


Scotland 


16 


p^^^ 


S 


Bwitnirldnd 


14 


Wett Indies 


23 


nthflr«M«ign« 


77 






Total foreign 


1,749 


1,436 


1.418 




Not reported 


165 


137 


134 






Grand total 


6,366 


4,944 


4,877 





• "Other foreten" includes 1 Armenia, 3 Australia, 2 Belfftom, 1 Brazil, 1 British Oolana. 4 China, 7 
Denmark, 2 Finland, 10 Qreeoe, 4 Holland, 1 India, 1 Japan, 8 Norway, 1 Nova Scotia, 1 PhlliDpine Islanosy 
8 Servla, 6 South Axnerica, 1 Spain, 1 Tripoli, 6 Turkey, 8 Wales and 82 foreign (not spedifed). 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



361 



Table 47. — Schooling of persons convicted, by country of birth: New York county and 
supreme courts j January 1 to December Sly 1907. 



[This table does not Inolade 1 oorporatkm.] 





Number. 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
reporting 

as to 
schooling. 


Number 
reporting 

no 
schooling. 


Number reporting schooling Indicated. 


Country of birth. 


Ck>mmon 
or public. 


Academy 
or high. 


CoUege. 


Other. 


Total. 


United States 


3,507 


1,023 


90 


873 


43 


14 


3 


933 






Austrla-HuriRary 


183 
63 
71 

19 

228 

164 
522 

38 
304 

18 

22 
14 
24 
97 


34 
32 
14 
6 
62 

33 
234 
30 
92 
4 

7 
2 
2 

48 


20 
3 
2 
1 
6 

8 
182 

8 
68 


14 
26 
11 

4 
65 

23 
50 
22 
24 

4 

7 

2 

1 

31 








14 


Canala 


2 

1 


2 




29 


Enf:land 




12 


France 






4 


Germany 


1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 




57 


Irplftnd 




25 


Italy 




52 


Poland 




22 


Russia 








24 


Scotland 








4 


Sweden 











7 


Switzerland 










2 


West Indies 


1 
16 








1 


Other foreign o 




i 




32 












Total foreign 


1.757 

2-18 

6,512 


699 


314 


27? 


6 


6 




2S5 








Not reported 


140 


18 


112 


5 


4i 1 


122 






Grand total 


1,762 


422 


1,258 


64 


24 I 4 


1,340 



a « Other foreign" includes: 1 Armenia, 3 Australia, 2 Belgium, 1 Brazil, 1 British Guiana, 4 China, 7 
Denmark, 2 Finland, 10 Greece, 4 Holland, 1 India, 1 Japan, 8 Norway. 1 Nova Scotia, 1 Philippine Islands, 
2 Servia, 6 South America, 1 Spain, 1 Tripoli, 6 Turkey, 3 Wales, and 32 foreign (not specified). 

Table 48. — Literacy of persons convicted^ by country of birth: New York county and 
supreme courts j January 1 to December SI, 1908. 



(This table does not include 2 corporations and 205 persons not reporting complete data. Persons reporting 
having attended school are included in columns 3 and 4.] 


Country of birth. 


Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
who 
read. 


Number 
who read 
and write. 


United States 


4,542 


4,434 


4.359 






Austria- 11 ungary , . 


283 

Y6 

10 

9 

112 

24 
822 

29 
176 
746 

22 
67 
19 
411 
26 

13 
16 
28 
121 


235 
72 
7 
9 

110 

23 
307 

20 
174 
471 

22 
46 
15 
804 
25 

11 

16 

20 

103 


235 


Canada 


72 


China 


7 


Cuba 


9 


England ... 


109 


France . , 


23 


Germany 


807 


Greece 


20 


Ireland ,.,,,...,, 


174 


Italy 


465 


Norway 


21 


Poland. 


45 


Roumania < 


15 




298 


SftOtll^d - r , 


25 


Sweden 


11 


flwitxArlfind . 


16 


West Indies 


20 


Other foreign • 


101 






Total foreign 


2,493 


1,989 


1,963 






Not reported 


142 


124 


124 






Grand total 


7,177 


6,647 


6,446 





• "Other foreign" includes 1 Africa, 3 Australia. 4 Belgium, 1 Bulgaria, 8 Denmark, 2 Finland. 7 Holland, 
1 New Zealand, 8 Nova Scotia, 6 Porto Rico, 1 Portugal, 2 Servia, 4 South America, 6 Spain, 9 Turkey Id 
Asia, 5 Wales, and 58 foreign (not specified). 

7»340''— VOL 36—11 ^24 



Digitized by 



Google 



362 



The Immigratiou Commission. 



Table 49.—Sehaolxng ofp€ra(mi convicted^ by country of birth: New York county ani 
supreme oourte, January 1 to December Sl^ 1908. 



CThis tAbto d068 not inciiidsa oorporattons.] 





Number 

oon- 

ylctad. 


Number 
reporting 

as to 
s(dio(4ing. 


Number 




Country of birth. 


no 
schooling. 


Common 
or public 


Academy 
orhii^ 


CoUege. 


Other. 


TotiL 




4,<U 


1,446 


106 


1,262 


41 


14 


90 


1.07 




Austria-Hungary 


289 
77 
10 
10 

118 

26 
827 

20 
181 
702 

22 
(8 
10 
414 
26 

14 
16 
23 
121 


84 
68 
4 


48 


85 

48 

1 






1 


36 


r^t^H^ 


1 




n 


China , 






1 


Caha 










Rnglonrl 


22 

1 

112 

11 

81 

884 

8 
40 

4 

161 

8 

8 

1 

4 

81 


16 
274 


17 


3 






20 


France 








Ofomany 


04 

2 

28 

100 

3 
87 


2 


1 




97 


Greeoa.r 




2 


Tmland... 


1 

1 


1 




30 


Italy 




116 


Norway 






3 


Poland. 


12 
107 








37 


Roumania 










Rniwift , 


41 
5 

1 

1 

1 

61 


3 
2 






44 


fV>ot]and. . . 






7 


Sweden 






1 


SwitEerland 








1 


West Indies 


18 








1 


Other foreign • 


2 




'.'.'.'.'.'.'..'.. 


61 








Total foreign 


2,&87 


1,006 


504 


484 


15 


2 


1 


502 


Not reported 


232 


^ 141 


18 


117 


3 


8 




la 








Grand total 


7,382 


2,502 


630 


1,868 


50 


10 


~~»' 


i,9fla 



• " other foreign " includes 1 Africa, 8 Australia, 4 Belgium. 1 Bulgaria, 8 Denmark, 2 Finland, 7 HoDand, 
1 New Zealand, 3 Nova Scotia, 6 Porto Rico, 1 Portugal, 2 Servia, 4 South America, 6 Spahi, 9 Turkey io 
Asia, 5 Wales, and 58 foreign (not specified). 

Table 50. — Literacy of pereone convicted, by offense: New York county and supreme 
courts y January 1, 1907, to December SI, 1908. 

[This table does not include 3 corporations and 351 persons not reporting complete data. Persons reported 
having attended school are included in columns 3 ana 4.) 



Offense. 



Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
who read. 


Number 
who read 
and write. 


10 


8 


8 


110 


102 


94 


34 


29 


29 


44 


40 


46 


7 


7 


7 


8 


7 


7 


213 


193 


I8S 


A 


5 


h 


2 




1 


3 




3 


302 


219 


217 


20 


11 


11 


9 




7 


3 




3 


175 


169 


160 


1 




1 


1 




1 



Offenses against chastity: 

Adultery 

Bigamy 

Crmie against nature 

Disorderly house, obscene prints, etc. . . 

Incest 

Seduction 

Total 

Offenses against public i>olicy: 

Bribery 

Comi>ounding crimes 

Conspiracy 

Crimes against public health and safety 
Crimes against public peace 

Escape 

False registration 

Gaming ^. 

Importing foreign criminals 

Libel .!;. 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



863 



Tablb 50.— Literacy of perBons convicted, by ofense: New York county and supreme 
courts, January 1, 1907, to December SI, 190S—ContmvLed. 



Offense. 



Number 

oon- 
Ticted. 



Number 
who read. 



Number 
who read 
and write. 



Offenses against public policy— Continued. 

Lotteiy 

Offenses against public justice 

Perjury 

Unlawful practice of medicine 

Various provisions of excise law, etc. . . . 



Total. 



Offenses against the person: 

Abandonment and other acts of cruelty to children . 

Abduction - 

Abortion 

Assault 

Coercion.^ 



Homicide.. 
Kidnaping . 
Maiming... 

RM>e 

Robbery... 
Buidde 



Total. 



Offenses against property: 

Arson 

Burglary 

Extortion 

False personations and cheats. 
Forgery 



Fraud 

Larceny 

Malicious mlsdiief and injuries to property. 
Receiving stolen property 



Total. 



Total defined offenses. 
Offenses not defined 



Grand total. 



1 
467 



1,010 



107 

62 

6 

1,807 

1 

17» 

13 

3 

185 

835 

17 



2,3U 



34 

2,941 

70 

7 

298 

1 

8,976 

67 

468 



7,802 



11,805 
1,238 



12,543 



81 

1 

407 



860 



51 

3 

1,042 

140 
9 
2 

161 

302 

14 



1,824 



30 

2,816 

58 

7 

295 

1 

3,763 

60 



7,453 



10,330 
1,161 



11,491 



81 

1 

402 



850 



99 

40 

3 

1,021 

1 

185 

9 

2 

157 

802 

14 



1,792 



29 

2,766 

55 

7 



1 

8,715 

57 

428 



7,345 



10,172 
1,151 



11,828 



Tablb 51. Schooling of persons convicted, by offense: New York county and supreme 
courts, January 1, 1907, to December SI, 1908. 

[This table does not include 3 oorporations.l 





Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
report- 
ing as to 
schooling. 


Number 
report- 
ing no 

schooling. 


Number reporting schooling Indicated. 


Offense. 


Common 
or public. 


Academy 
or high. 


CoUese. 


Other. 


Total. 


OfTenses agataist ohaa- 
AduKery 


12 
HI 

35 

49 
8 

8 


9 
85 

17 

33 
3 
3 


2 

8 

5 

4 


7 
25 

12 

27 
8 
2 








7 


Bigamy 

Grbne against na- 
ture 


2 




.*..••••.. 


27 






12 


Disorderly house, 
obecene prints, 
etc 


2 






29 


Incest 






3 


Seduction 


1 








2 












Total 


228 


100 


20 


76 


4 






SO 












Digitized by 



Google 



364 



The Immigration Commission. 



Table Sl.^Schooling of persons convictedy hy offense: New Yort county and supreme 
courtSy januctry 1, 1907 ^ to Decmher Sl^ 1908 — Continued. 





Number 


Number 
report- 
ing as to 
schooling. 


Number 
report- 
ing no 
schooling. 


Number reporting schooling Indicated. 


Offense. 


con- 
victed. 


Common 
or public. 


Academy 
or high. 


CoHege. 


Other. 


Total 


OffenseB against public 
policy: 
Bribery 




2 

3 

310 

23 

9 

3 

177 

1 
1 

2 

1 
35 

1 

580 


2 

1 


1 
1 


1 








1 


Compounding 
crimes . . 










Conspiracy 












Crimes against pub- 
lic health and 
safety 


107 
19 

7 


83 
9 
2 


24 

10 

4 








21 


Crimes against pub- 
lic peace 








10 


Escape 


1 




. 


5 


False registration.. 
Gaming 








32 


6 


25 


1 




as 


Importing foreign 
criminals 








Libel 
















Lottery . . . 


2 

1 
19 

1 

330 


1 

1 
2 


1 








1 


Offenses against 

public Justice 

Perjury 










16 




1 




17 


Unlawful practice 
of medicine 


1 

7 




1 


Various provisions 
ofexciselaw,etc.. 


60 


271 


1 


1 


2S0 


Total 


1,164 


521 


166 


352 


10 


2 


1 


365 






Offenses against the per- 
son: 
Abandonment and 
other acts of 
cruelty to chil- 
dren 


110 

62 

8 

1,333 

1 

190 
12 

.«! 

340 
17 


78 

23 

4 

601 


8 
11 
3 

265 


66 
12 


3 




1 


70 


AbdiKition 




13 


Abortion 




1 




1 


Assault 


331 


5 




336 


Coercion 








Homicide 


73 
5 
2 
113 
145 
7 


30 
3 
1 

24 

a3 

3 


33 
2 

1 

85 

110 

4 


1 






34 


Kidnaping 






3 


M^ilming 








1 


Rape. .7 


3 

1 




1 


S9 


Robbery 





113 


Suicide 




4 










Total 


2.264 


i.niii 


390 


644 


13 ' 2 ; 2 


661 








Offenses against prop- 
Arson 


* 35 

2,999 
70 

7 
302 

1 
4,041 

71 
472 


17 

1,105 

22 

3 
101 

1 
969 

46 
249 


4 
126 
12 


13 

944 

9 

3 

79 

1 
«88 

89 
193 








18 


Burglary 


25 

1 


6 


6 


980 


Extortion 


10 


False personations 
and cheats 






3 




3 


12 


7 




98 


Fraud 




1 


Larceny 


213 

7 
45 


36 


21 


11 


756 


Malicious mischief 
and injuries to 
property 


39 


Receiving stolen 
nroDcrtv 


8 


8 




204 








Total 


7,998 


2 Ria 


409 


1.969 


82 


36 


17 


2,104 








Total defined of- 
fenses 

Offenses not defined. . . 


11,639 
1,255 


4,1S5 
169 


976 

77 


8,041 
80 


109 
4 


40 
8 


90 
6 


8,210 
93 


Grand total 


12,894 4,854 


1,052 


8,121 


113 


43 


26 


8,303 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



365 



Table fi2.— Literacy of pereom convictedy by offense: New York county and tupreme 
caurtSy January 1 to December SI, 19C7, 

|Thit teble does not inehide 1 oocpontkm and 148 penona not reporting complete dati. Peraons reporttof 
having attended aohooi are incladed in colamn^ 3 and 4.) 



Offense. 



Nnmber 

con- 

vksted. 



Number 
who read. 



Number 
who read 
and writs. 



Offenses against chastity: 

Crune against nature 

Disorderly bouse, obscene prints, etc. 

looert 

Seduction 



Total. 



Offenses against pubUo policy: 

Bribery 

Compounding crimes 

Crimes against public health and safety., 

Crimes against public peace 

Escape 



False registration 

Oaming 

Importing foreign criminals 

PeiWy 'ii' •--••••••••. -••••••-'•• 

Various provisions of excise law, etc . 



Total. 



Offenses against the person: 

Abandonment and other acts of omalty to children . 

Abduction 

Abortion 

Ananlt. 

Homidde 



Kkbu^ing. 
Maiming... 

Bape 

Bobbery... 
Boleids 



Total. 



against property: 

Arson 

Burglary 

Extortion 

False perBonatlons and cheats 

Forgery 

Larceny 

Ifaiidous mischief and iiUurtas to property. 
Baodving stolen property 



Total. 



Total dsflned offenses. 
Ollmses not defined 



Qrand total. 



103 



1 
1 
135 
£ 
3 

3 

«7 
1 
1 

10 
195 



67 
33 
2 
612 
86 

4 

8 

78 
148 

7 



1,039 



11 

1,167 

26 

4 

133 

2,067 

34 

188 



8,899 

6,162 
214 



6,880 



97 



10 
177 



361 



61 

27 

2 

482 

67 

4 

2 
66 
136 

7 



854 



9 

1,134 

20 

4 

133 

1,962 

19 

160 



3,430 

4,742 
203 



4,944 



63 
13 
34 

4 
1 



1 
1 
93 
6 
3 

8 

66 

1 



10 
173 



868 



61 
35 
3 

474 
67 

4 
3 
64 

136 
7 



843 



8 

1,113 
30 

4 

130 

1,936 

17 

160 



3,387 

4,676 
202 



4»877 



Digitized by 



Google 



866 



The InunigratioD Commission. 



Table 53* — Schooling ofper$on$ convictedt by ofen$e: New York county and tujiremt 
coujtt, January 1 to Deember SI, 1907. 



(Thit tebto does not Incliidt 1 eofpocmtiooj 





Number 

ooo- 
Tlot«d. 


Number 

report 

tngasto 

schooling. 


Number 
report- 
ing no 

schooling. 


Number reportbig sebooUng indicated. 


OfleoM. 


Common 
orpobUe. 


Academy 
or high. 


College. 


Other. 


TotaL 


OtbDMf acatnit chat- 
ttty: 

Bigain J. ...... r T » r , 


60 
16 

27 

4 
1 


21 
10 

15 


8 
3 


16 
7 

15 


a 






18 


CrfiiM 'tfiiiift Oft- 

tern* .........r-.r 






7 


Dlwrdoly bouse, 
obflceoa prinu, 
etc 








IS 


Incest 












Seductkm 


1 




1 








1 














Total 


108 


47 


ft 


39 


2 






41 




■ ' 






Oflanses against public 
Bribery 


1 
1 

126 

8 
2 

3 
68 

1 

1 

11 

249 
















Compounding 
crimes 
















Crimes against pub- 
lic bealth and 
safety 


38 

4 
1 


31 


7 

4 

1 








7 


Crimes against pub- 
lic peaoe. ........ 








4 


Esc^M 




» 






1 


False registration... 












Qaming 


6 




5 


•1 






6 


Importinf foreign 
rrlmlnals 










Lottery 


1 
6 

154 


1 












Perjury 


5 
131 




1 




6 


Various provisions 
of excise law, etc. 


18 


5 




IM 










Total 


470 


210 


50 


153 1 6 


1 




160 




1 






OfTenses against the 
person: 
Abandonment and 
other acta of cru- 
elty to children... 


68 
83 
3 
622 
89 

4 
3 
79 
149 
7 


44 

15 

1 

254 

36 


6 
6 


36 

9 


2 






18 


Abduction 






9 


Abortion 




1 




1 


Assault 


130 
18 


122 
17 


2 

1 




U4 


Homicide 


;:::::::::'::::::::: 


18 


Kidnaping 








Maiming 


2 

48 
64 

2 


1 

12 
12 


1 
33 
51 

2 








1 


Rape..r 


2 




1 


36 


Robbery 


1 


53 


Suicide 






i 














Total 


1,057 


466 


185 


271 


7 


2 


1 281 






Offenses against prop- 
Anon 


11 

1,185 

26 

4 

134 
2,079 

27 
190 


6 
880 

7 

2 

46 
434 

12 
104 


2 
83 
5 


4 
835 

1 

a 

89 
297 

7 
79 








4 


Burglary 


9 
1 


1 


2 


347 


Extortion 


2 


False personations 
and bleats 






2 


Forgery 




5 
17 


2 
14 




46 


Larceny 

Malicious mischief 
and injuries to 

Receiving **itoien' 
property 


105 

6 

10 


1 


329 

7 


8 


3 




8S 










Total 


3.655 


001 


160 


764 


35 ' 20 3 


822 




• 




Total defined of- 
fenses 

Ofltaisee not defined 


222 


1,714 
48 


410 
12 


^'U 


50i 23 
4 1 


4 


»-u 








Grand total 


5,512 


1,762 


422 


1,858 


54 


24 


4 


i,j« 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables, 



367 



Table 54:. ^Literacy of perwm oonvicUd, by offense: New Yorl county and supreme 
courti, January 1 to December SI, 1908. 

(This toble does not inchide 2 oosporatiims and 206 persons not raporting complete (^ Persons reporting 
hftylng attended school are included in oolomns 3 and 4.) 



Offense. 


Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 
who 
read. 


Number 

who read 

and 

write. 


Adultnry 


10 
51 
10 
20 
3 
7 


8 
46 
17 
16 
3 
6 


8 


Bicamj 


42 


Crime Xg^l^wt nature , 


17 


Disorderly house, obscene prints, etc 


16 


Incest../. .'. ' .' „ 


3 

6 






Total 


110 


96 


92 






Offenses against public policy: 

Bribery 


5 
1 
3 
177 
15 

7 
106 

1 
1 

1 

23 

1 

202 


4 


4 


Compounding ci1m<« 




Con^iraoy..*! 


8 

126 

6 

5 
102 

1 
1 


8 


Crimes against pMNI<^ health and safety, x ...... x 


124 


CHmw against public peam '......................... 


6 


Escape... .. , 


6 


Oanilag.... x.......... 


101 


Libel... 


1 


Lottery * 


1 








21 

1 

230 


21 


Unlawfol practice of medicine 


1 


Various provisions of excise law, etc 


230 






Total 


006 


499 


497 






Oilenses asainst the person: 

Abandonment and other acts of cruelty to children 


40 
29 

4 

006 

1 

94 

8 

107 

187 

10 


38 

24 

1 
560 

1 

73 
5 

96 

166 

7 


38 


Abduction 1 


24 


Abortion 


1 


Assault. 


547 




1 


Homicide 


68 


Kidnf^ping ^ 


5 


Rape 


93 


Robbery 


166 


guidde 


7 






Total 


1,175 


970 


950 






Offenses against property: 

Arson 


23 

1,784 

45 

3 

166 

1 

1.019 

43 

280 


21 

1,602 

38 

3 

162 

254 


21 


Burglary 


1,663 


Extortion 


35 


FalifA personations and cheats x ... . 


3 




162 


Fraud 


1 


Larceny 


1,789 


Malicious mischief and faijuries to property 


40 


Receiving stolen property 


254 






Total 


4,268 


4,023 


3,958 






Total defined oftenses*. 


6,153 
1,024 


5,588 
969 


5,497 


Offenses not defined 


949 






Grand tot«I.,, 


7,177 


6,547 


6,446 







Digitized by 



Google 



868 



The ImmigratioQ Conunission. 



Tablb 55* — iSchooling of persons convicted^ by offense: New York county and supreme 
eouTtSy January 1 to December SI, 1908. 

(This table does not inctade 2 oorporatioos.1 





Number 

oon- 
Tlcted. 


Number 

reporting 

as to 

school. 

tag. 


Number 


Number reporting schooling tadicated. 


Oifeiiae. 


no 
school- 
ing. 


Common 
or public. 


Academy 
or high. 


CoUege. 


Other. 


Total 


Offlenses against ofaas- 
Adnltarj 


61 
10 

22 

4 
7 



14 

7 

18 
3 
2 


2 
6 

2 

4 


7 


6 

12 
3 
1 








7 


Cmne aipdnstnik 
turs. 








9 








6 


Disofdflrij hoosa, 
obsoana prints, 
otc.... ........... 


2 






u 


iDoest. 






3 


Bednotioo 


1 








1 












Total 


115 


63 


14 


37 


2 






99 










^'^li^ 


A 

1 
S 

185 

U 

7 
100 

1 
1 

1 
24 

1 

831 


2 
1 


1 
1 


1 








1 


Compounding 
orimof 










Consptraey 

Crimea against pnb- 
Uo health and 
safety 

Crimes against pnb- 
Uopeaoa^x^x 












00 

16 


26 


62 



2 
6 


17 



8 
20 








17 








e 


E80U)e. 


1 






4 


Qamuig 






ao 


Libel..T 










Lottery 


I 

1 
18 

1 

176 




1 








1 


Offenses against 
pubUo Justice 

Unlawfal * pnc^ioe 
<<ni4dif4ne.. . . 


1 
2 










11 








11 


1 
2 






1 


Various provisions 
ofexeiselaw,etc.. 


82 


140 


1 


1 


144 


TotaL 


684 


811 


106 


100 


4 


1 


1 


ao6 






Offenses against the 

^^^jUMadonmentand 

other acts of oni- 

elty to children.. 

Abduction 


42 

20 

5 

7U 

1 

101 
8 
100 
101 
10 


84 

8 

3 

347 


2 

6 

3 

136 


80 
3 


1 




1 


ss 




s 


Abortion. 










Amanlt 


200 


3 






213 


CoerdoD. .......... 








Homicide 


87 
6 
66 
81 
6 


21 
8 
12 
21 
8 


16 
2 
62 
60 
2 








16 


Eidnauine 








2 


Rape 


1 
1 






51 


RoSbeiry 






60 


Suicide.. 






2 












Total. 


1,207 


686 


206 


873 


6 




1 


380 








Oflienses against prop- 
ertv: 
Anon 


24 

1,814 
46 

3 
108 

1 
1,002 

44 


11 

726 

15 

1 
65 

1 
635 

84 


9 

02 

7 




600 

8 

1 
40 

1 
801 

32 








9 




16 


4 


4 


688 


Extortion 


8 


False personations 
and^eats 








1 


POIIBHTV 


8* 


7 


6 




5S 


Fraud 




1 


Larceny 

Malicious mischief 
and injuries to 
property 


106 

t 


10 


7 


10 


427 




Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



369 



Table SSm—Sdiooling of penons convicted^ by offeme: New York county and supreme 
GourUf January 1 to December SI, 1908 — Continued. 





Number 

con- 
victed. 


Number 

reporting 

as to 

school- 
ing. 


Number 
reporting 


Number reporting sdiooling indicated. 


Offlenie. 


no 
school- 
ing. 


Common 
or pubtto. 


Academy 
or high. 


College. 


Other. 


Total 


(Mfenaes against prop- 
ertr— ContUiQed. 
Reoeiving stolen 


382 


146 


26 


114 


5 






119 










Total 


4,343 


1,522 


240 


1,206 


47 


16 


14 


1,282 






Total defined 

oflensra 

OflEenaes not defined.... 


6,349 
1,033 


2,471 
121 


566 

65 


1,814 
49 


69 


17 
2 


16 
5 


1,906 
56 








Grand total... 


7,382 


2,592 


630 


1.863 


59 


19 


21 


1,962 



Tablb 56* — Conjugal condition of persons convicted^ by country of birth: New York 
county ana mprerru courts, January 1, 1907, to December SI, 1908. 

(This table does not include 3 corporations and 199 persons not reportinc complete data.] 



Country of birth. 


Single. 


Married. 


Widowed. 


Divorced. 


Total. 


United States 


5,796 


2,271 


25 


1 


8,003 






Anstrfa-Hnngmy , . . 


329 
78 
8 
5 
7 

112 
30 

350 
30 
6 

221 
815 
21 
66 

13 
511 
27 
21 

20 
10 
34 
97 


142 

52 

6 

5 

8 

60 
15 
199 
9 
5 

118 

467 

8 

80 

6 

206 

16 

14 

8 
5 
13 
57 






471 


Canada ' " 






130 


China 






14 


Cuba 






10 


Denmark x w . 






15 


England . ....... . . . . 


3 




184 


Ptmk^ ,. ,., 




46 


OflTmany 


4 




653 


Greece, r..' 




39 


HoUand .. 






11 


TM^H 


5 




344 


Italy 




1,282 


Norway ... . 


1 

1 




30 


Poi^n'i 




96 


Roumania. .... 




19 


Russia 


1 
1 

1 

2 




718 


gf'iotland 




44 


Sweden 




36 


Ssjtceriand 




30 


Turkey. 




16 


West Indies 






47 


Other foreign • 


1 




155 








Toti^ foraign . . . . . 


2,810 


1,458 


20 





4,288 










Not reported 


181 


129 


4l 


314 






Grand total 


8,787 


3,858 


49 1 


12,095 







• ''Other foreign'' includes 1 Africa, 1 Armenia, 6 Australia, 6 Belgium, 1 British Guiana, 1 Brazil, 1 
Bulgaria, 4 Finland, 1 India, 1 Japan, 1 New Zealand, 4 Nova Scotia, 1 Philippine Islands, 6 Porto Rico, 
1 Portugal, 4 Servia, 9 South America, 7 Spain, 1 Tr^li, 8 Wales, and 90 foreign (not specified). 



Digitized by 



Google 



370 



The Immigration G>mmission. 



Table 57. — Omjugal condition of perdons oonvictedf by country of birth: New York 
county and iupreme courti, January 1 to December SI, 1907, 

[This table does not include 1 oorporation and 06 pecaons not reporting complete data.) 



Country of birth. 


Sin^e. 


Married. 


Widowed. 


DiYoroed. 


Total 


United States 


2,487 


992 


14 


1 


3,494 






A ustria-H angary 


123 
32 
43 
15 

137 

109 
822 

28 
212 

10 

8 
10 
18 
62 


00 
21 
27 
4 

88 

52 
200 

9 
91 
7 

13 
4 

6 
35 






183 


Canada T. . .' 






53 


KhfUik) 


1 




71 


France 




19 


Germany 


2 
3 




227 


TT9)^n<i,. 




164 


Italy 




622 


Poland 


1 
1 
1 

1 




38 


Russia 




804 


Scotland 




18 


Sweden 




22 


Switzerland.. . 




14 


West Indies 






24 


Other foreign • 






97 










Total foreign 


1,129 


617 


10 




1,756 






Not reported •. 


99 


62 


8 




164 








Grand total 


3,716 


1,671 


27 


1 


5,414 





• "Other foreign" includes 1 Armenia, 3 Australia, 2 Belgium, 1 Braiil, 1 British Guiana, 4 China, 7 
Denmark, 2 Finland, 10 Greece, 4 Holland, 1 India, 1 Japan, 8 Norway, 1 Nova Scotia, 1 Philippine 
Islands, 2 Servia, 5 South America, 1 Spain, 1 Tripoli, 6 Turkey, 8 Wales, and 32 foreign (not spedfieo). 

Table 58. — Conjugal condition of persons convicted^ by country of birth: New York 
county and supreme courts^ January 1 to December SI, 1908. 

[This table does not include 2 corporations and 101 persons not reporting complete data.] 



Country of bhth. 


Single. 


Married. 


Widowed. 


Divorced. 


TotaL 


United States 


3,309 


1,279 


11 




4,599 








Austria-Hungary 


206 
46 
6 
5 
69 

16 
213 

23 
112 
493 

15 
37 
13 
299 
17 

13 
10 

16 

74 


82 
31 
6 
6 
42 

11 

111 

6 

66 
267 

6 
21 
6 
115 
9 

1 
4 
7 
46 






288 


Canada 






77 


China 






10 


Cuba 






10 


Eneland 


2 




113 


France .r...... 




25 


Germany. 


2 




326 


Greece.. 




29 


Ireland 


2 




180 


Itaiv 




760 


Norway 


1 




22 


Poland. 




58 


Roumania. 






19 


Russia 






414 


Scotland 






26 


Sweden 






U 


Switzerland 


2 




16 


West Indies 




23 


Other foreign* 


1 




121 








Total foreign 


1,681 


841 


10 




2,532 








Not reported 


82 


67 


1 




150 








Grand total 


5,072 


2,187 


22 




7,281 









• "Other foreicn" includes 1 Africa. 3 Australia, 4 Belgium, 1 Bulgaria, 8 Denmark. 2 Finland, 7 Hol- 
land, 1 New Zealand, 3 Nova Scotia, 6 Porto Rioo^ 1 Portugal, 2 Serria, 4 Sooth AmflHoa, 6 Spain, 9 Tor- 
key, 5 Wales, and 58 foreign (not specified). 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



.371 



£ 


1 


rnox 




































oa 




"^ 






» 




•airoraj 




































: 


j 




:| 


•erBjf 






























1 






00 


FN 




Ok U 


t 


WOJ, 


^ 


'^ : 


«o 


o^ 


(^ ' 












00 o, 


s 


s 


FN 


1 




•01OTI9J 


: 


: i 


: 


: : 


\ \ 














- 


M 


1 


OQ 




•9|BH 


1« 


w4 1 


•o 


<OfN 


t* '' 












«N 


ss 


3 


FN 


s 




1 


WOJ. 


-^ 


w^wt 


CO 












'^ 




-^ 








o 


00 




00 




•91TOMJ 


: 


\ \ 


























: 


« 




M 




•nR 


r^ 


^1-N 


CO 












'^ 




- 








2 


<o 




<o 








Wox 


'^ 






F* 








- 


II 










M 




Zn 


2 




8 








•9ITOWJ 


j 






' '^ 






-- 


; 


II 










: 




1 


FN 




tM 




o 


•9IBH 


-^ 




















« 




7i 


C4 




^ 




1 


•WOJ, 




















1 
















FN 








- 




•9IBUI9J 




















1 
















: 












•9|«K 




















1 
















- 








- 




1 


•IBIOJ, 


N 






c« 


























-^ 


C4 




eo 




•9I«U»J 


j 
































: 


: 








••IBH 


w 






C4 










II 
















FN 


C4 




00 




1 


-mojj 


FN 


FN • 


M 








FN 






FN '• 


-- 








M 


M 




-* 




•ei«ui9j 


i 


i j 


1 








: 






i j 










: 


FN 




^ 




•OIBH 


FN 


FN • 


c« 








- 


1 




tM J 


FN 








w 


FN 




to 




IE 


rnox 


00 






00 


FN • 


^ : 


1 


FN 




FN 








2 


C9 




^ 




•9lTO»i 


', 






: 


FN • 


- : 


1 














^ 


; 




FN 




•oi«H 


00 






00 












FN 




-^ 








94 


a 




s 




QO 


•TOOX 


^5*^2 : 


^ 


^ ; 


a-^ 


1 




«OfN 


00 


2--S -8- i 


1 




•ITOMi 


M 






c« 


« I 


W '; 


I- 








1 






t* 


•o 




w 




•otBH 


5*^2 : 


fi 


8 : 


8-^ 


|- 


«FN 


OO 


g-«g -s- : 


S 








' 




1 




- 


1 




< 


i 
1 

f 




< 


1 


1 




1 

1 






i 


i 


1 
1 


a 













Digitized by 



Google 



372 



The Immigration Commission. 









4 



I 






I 



^ 2 



I 



•§> 






I" 

10 



n 



I 



S 



3 



I 



1 



I 



00 

1 

p 



moj. 



'9i«in9j 



•OIBK 



Wox 



*9I«III9J 



•OIBK 



moj, 



'eivuidj 



•9I«H 



mox 



•ofvmej 



•9IBH 



'afsmoj 



•9I«H 



moji 



'ornnaj 



•OIBH 



•moj, 



'9|«1ZI9J 



•91«K 



WOX 



*a|1iuidj 



•eiBK 



•moj, 



-efniraj 



•»1«H 



O 



8-" 



f>4C<«C«F4 •* 



35^ ^g^ e^cQ^i; ^ 0C.5 



'^'^ '^s'^ '^*'* '^ S"' 



f 



gnn 



"It 

&liltt 

ca 




Iftfglltf 




a3 33w s3a3< 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



873 



i-^s 




S-^ 






gel 

ill If 

gOcQ I 



ii: 



to 

lis 



Digitized by 



Google 



874 



The Immigration Commissicm. 









I 
1 

8 

I 
I 

i| 

1 



•^ 



•8 
•5 



b 

S 



S 



I 



I 



<6 



moj, 



'wpiuubjl 



•»1»H 



ItWL 



'•fniOji 



WOX 



'apnnaj 



•1»|0i 



*9(vni9^ 



••TOl 



moji 



*e|v<u9ji 



••l»JI 



•mox 



'•fnmj 



•mox 



'•Tsnnji 



•mox 



*91«m9j 



-I 






•WOX 



cigctoo 



tM-^OOi- 



5 --sss*^ 



CD 

I 



'•rniraj 



••1»H 



•^•*oj^e 



9 -"ssa- 



«3 

o 




Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



375 



"I 



8" 



i 



0-< ION 



8 -"S 



J 
It 



if 



V 



^to 8 8 i z 

nil $s 



•OTJ'O'O 

oooo 



ggigg 



I fill §: 



ll 



MP 



11 



It 



ll 

ill 
ill 



11 



Hi 



II 



Digitized by 



Google 



376 



The ImmigraticNi Commission. 



♦3 



o 



?; 
^ 

5 
S 



I 



^ 



O o 



1 



I 



3 
■I 






10 



pa 
»4 



s 


1 


•pnox 


^ 


















! *^ 


(O . 


II : : 
II : : 


• • 'M 


-• eo 


— :- 


il 


•aiBOxaj' 


: 
















: : : : 




: : : j 






•d[BH 


- 
















! '^^ i 




i i i^ 


-i eo 






t 


•Wox 




.•^ : 






eo 


o : 


• eoao • 


j j 


jt* 'C* 


"•■ eo 






-aiBma^ 




j ; 










\ : M 




: : : : 








•»I«H 




»H j 






eo 


o : 


coeo • 


1 : : 


• t^ •M 


" 2 






1 


WOJ, 






















00 j 




i i !*^ 


: " 






•dlBOxaj 






















Ct '' 






* I 


: 


i 1 


•oi^W 






















«o j 




i i i*^ 


• eo 




!; 


c 

SS 

E 


•mox 








■^ 




-^ 


w J 


^00 '• 








- 


:l 


•aiBuwj 
















: : : : 








- 


: 1 


•9IBH 








- 




^ 


M j 


i "**> : 








1 i 




8 


■rwox 






















^ : 




: : -" : 


i -^ . 






•OIBOIdJ 






















1 ; 




: : : : 








•apw 






















•^ : 




: : '^ : 


: ^ : 






f 


•mox 
















'^ : 


: -H 




: : 


:^ :- 


o 






•oiOTiaj 
















: : 


: 






: : : ! 




i : 




•9i«w 
















-^ : 


. ^ 




II ;i 


:^ i- 


.' ^ 






« 


•mox 
















-^ : 


^^ J 


II ii 


•^ : : 


: -- : 


ii 

II i 




*9ivmaj 


















: i i 


ii 


: : : : 


: : : 


1 : 
1 : 




•91«W 
















- : 


— ^ : 




:-" : : 


: - : 








•I«;ox 
















M j 


CIM '• 




jw ; ; 


• IN : 


1 '. 




•ai«nraj 
















j : 


\ \ ! 






: : : 


i i' 


4 


•dIBR 
















M ' 


N« '. 


'' ' 


j« i i 


: ** ; 






1 

en 

1 


•WOX 


N«^C«e«9 ^oow^^^ 


^S i 




-*« -2 


^ s-^ 






•aiBraai 






















t^ ; 




i"* i i 


• "* j 


i 




•oi«K 




5§ : 




*S '^Sl 


g §-^ 


IN 






1 

O 




1 

1' 


£ 

< 


1; 


a. 

11 






•o 










ii 

82 

..II 
III 
& 


Attempted robbery, second 

Robbery, first 

Robbery, first; assault, second; and grand 

larceny, second 

Robbery, second. « 


JcvoDowy, uuru 

Total 

Seduction under promise to marry 


i 
1 





Digitized by 



Google 



'General Tables. 



377 







! : '^ ! ! 


• • ^ 




s 






'» '» w^ l I 


1 ! f4 




09 


.• 




: : : : ; 


: : : 




S 




;^ 


^^ act \ 


i i 5: 




U 




: i 


: : : : : 






«o 




••* 


^^ OkC« J 


I: M: 


S 




•CI 


: : « I : 


00 




2 




: : i 


• t « ■ • 


1 • • 




a 




• 


: i ^ \ \ 


00 




2 


'^11 i i 


: i - : i" 


t I ^ 




§ 


^ D * i 


: : : i : 






s 




1 : : i 


: : - ! r 


' i ^ 




S 




: : : 








s 












«-^ 












s 




ill 


: : lo • ! 


1 : le 




K 






: : : : i 










1 ii: 


• • •« _• 1 


I 1 lO 




1 i i i 


• • 00 J •«- 


1 1 a» 


' 


s 




1 \\\ 


I \ • • ! 




\\\ 


« 




II i i : 


'• '. « I !i- 


1 • a» 




9 


CI 


1 ^^ i 


r : « :- 


i i •** 




s 


CI 


i • • * 


: i Mi 


i : : 




«0 




1 -'■ 


i i •* i*^ 


i i '^ 




5 




«co 


j : 8^ :•' 


• ^ o 










J ! «^ I 


1 '. CO 




§ 




WW ! 


: : a- :^ 


'^ 1 






i 


Violations of various provisions of liquor law, 
excise law, etc.: 

Election law 

Excise law 

Labor law 


Liquor law 

Liquor law (second offense) 

Liquor-tax law 

Liquor, a 


Total 


1 





79340*--voL 36—11- 



-25 



Digitized by 



Google 



J78 



The Immigration O>mmission. 



5 


1 


•moj, 


5 


;««^ 


S 


II S8- 


s« 


F^CttOF^ 


f4 


1 ^' 


'"a -r- 


' i 


1 


••ITOWJ 


M j 1 1 


M 


II ^ 


«e<H 


: i i : 




1 i i :2 j- : 


i S 


1*1 


•NW 


ogoog^ 


s 


9' 


' g*' 


II ^e«t«F4 


f4 


j ^•'*'S "§"" 


• i 


n 


•WOi 




e«e« • 


^ 


f4 


(-1 


1 ^ 








U *^ 




2 :• : 


: ^ 


I 


tnraw^ 




: : i 


: 


: 


: 


1 i 








1 i 




: : : i 




•91«H 




MC« 1 


^ 


- 


^ 


1 i 








II '^ 




2 :• : 


: S 


1 


i 


mox 


gj^^^ 


n 


o»^ 


S« 


I 


N^ J 


CO 


1 ^"^ 


2 jsr 




i 


•91TOI9J 


: : i i 


: 


f4 


f4<h 




\ : : 




II : i ; 


eo J« J 


• » 


1 


•NW 


g^^^ 


S 


00 «M 


1- a^ 


' 


N^ •' 


eo 


S^ : 


s isi' 


• § 


o. 


•mox 


























c« ja 1^ 


' a 


1 


•91TOWJ 


























*^ III 


;- 


f 


•9i«H 


























j5 :• i" 


<s| 




II 


Wox 






















<H 




eo 1^ \ 


• iO 


1 


•91OTI9i 






















: 




: : : i 


; ; 


1 


••1«H 






















-^ 




00 1^ 1 


• to 


] 


WOX 






























it 


•9iirai9i 






























••PJH 










i 




: 








! 








1 


mox 




»H 




»H 


i 




















IT 


•91TOI9i 




: 




2 






: 








! = 








r 

1 


•9|«Jl 




-^ 




F^ 














. 








1 


•Wox 






















: 




c« • • ' 


' N 


-9IV1II9J 


























t ! I ' 


i : 


•9i«K 






















= 




w i : : 


' n 


1 


•fHOX 


«0 M 


H I 


•* 


e« 


c« 










^ 




2 :2 : 


: ^ 


1 


•91OTI9J 


i j 


: j 


j 


: 


: 


i 








i 




i ! i : 


i i 


••1»K 


e :« 


H I 


h- 


e< 


e< 


1 : 








II i 




2 j2 : 


: ^ 


i 




1 




1 
s 

1 
11 

a c 

r 


1 
1 

'1 


is 
II 

if 




b 

•i 
:£ 

Ji 

-< 


1 

: 

; 

: 

I 

: 

: 

t 


i 


h 

<< 


a 
B 




•1 


ii 
|§ 

11 

« 


i iiii 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



379 



8-" 



^(HlOMt-l AC^v^F^iH 



c««H c««05! ^ ^^9 ^ eoctao 



=*3 '^ S^'^i 



S?'^ 



<H<HIOC*<H 



g«^^^ ^1 



'«i^ c<«05! <^ ^cih- ^ cocto 



5J . «-• 



15 "^ - 



S8 







__^__ is PSS3^ 

npQfSOQOQ CQ CQflQ OQ flQ0Q(2QO3 



Digitized by 



Google 



380 



The ImmigratioQ Commission. 









I 



-3 



I 



^1 



1 

s 



%• 



"8 



^ 



0^ 



a 



•mox 



'OIVUUJ 



^3 



mox 



'sivmsj 



•aiBK 



Tnox 



I 



tiwroj, 



•»1«K 



o] 



•mox 



■•nniwj 



••[BK 



^1 



TB^ox 



'sivmsj 



•aiBH 



mox 



*ei«aiaj 



GO 



•9l«H 



mox 



I 

CD 



-9itraioj 
•9I«H 



9 



•mox 



'91«ni9j 



•IBfl 



mox 



'9f«m9j 



•»I«K 



S 



H — 



§ — 



5— 



8— 



§1 



^ 



8-^ 



s;| -"-^ 




C« ^00»4 






IP" 



••P I 8 



14 J 
sill 
lIP 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



381 



imn 



f^^^n coQct 



8"a 



SI — s* 



-I i;!;: 



«-" 



-fesg- 



CO I ^^«H00 M 



S«8 



^<O^C*IO 



-^ssg- 



-^8 



-^a 



!l 



9*9 



-S 



... 



2*S 



-T 



^ 



I 



l\ 



III 






II 




Ml 



IM. 



I 






ii 



li 



..II 
111 






^ mm 



Digitized by 



Google 



382 



The Immigration Commission. 






I 






>> 

B 



i§ 



I 






il 



1 

3 
s 

•I 

5' 



i 



&l 



i 
1 






ol 



H 
n 



moX 



'opmiBj 



•9I«H 



mox 









•niw 






•»I«R 



•mox 



'9ninioj 



•niw 



CQ 



I 

QQ 



mox 



'9l«1I»J 



•9!«K 



moj, 



-animej 



•9i«H 



mox 



'8frax9j 



•9|«H 



•l«1ox 



*9|«ni9i[ 



•9|«K 



HlQ t-lr4 ^1^ iHC 



^r^SB ^^ ^»H ^Md 



S -^^ 






8- 



MCfeMM 



^ 



0^ 

S 



s 



s 



ill 

lit 



lll^ll 



II 



m 









I 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



383 



tn s -"2 -""-a s^ 



« r3 « 



-H«« ^gcg^^ gg-. c^^g c^g g 



:9 



^S58 



co^^eoto »H«pc«^^^ 



gs-^ 



"-"'a ^c5S 



HgJ« 



^23 



I 




!^;«^ 



a 



9^ 



S.S.S.S. 

esse 
till 

0,0, (XOi 



^^<<^<<f< I 



t. 

ii 

11 

111 



Digitized by 



Google 



884 



The Immigration Commission. 



•0 



2 



I 



I 



t 



I 



I 



5'S 



I 

1 



§ 



^ 



I 

H 

g 
e5 



1 


•moj, 


1H 


W-K 


1 »<- 


«8« 


»^^ g-S« 


.. § 


r 


•9 


MWTOi 


V J 


^e< 


1 M 


HI:: -»- : 


iiHii 


•VH 


^^ 


MK 


1 •* 


•^s^-^^ gss* 


•. g 




1! 


•mox 




^4 


•H 


is* 


» i : S'-S 


i : 8 


-s 


••ITOIBJ 




: 


J 


'>r^ 


: : «H : : 


: : ** 


• •o 


•oroi 




^ 


»H 


iS« 


► i : S^9 


I : ^ 


"? 


' 


1 


mox 




«<< 


«o 


^c» 


:'^'^ get^e 


' : ^ 




g 


•orniwi 




»HC< 


•0 


i : 


: : ** i : 


• • c« 




S 


•VH 




^e< 


«e 


.HOI 


••^iH CJIMfXe 


' i » 






h 


•mox 




• « 


e« 




•■•*•• 


• • ^ 




^ 


•enraiBj 






j 






: : : 




^ 


•VH 




jei 


e« 


ii 


: : ^ : : 


i ■* 




s 


H 


Tnoi 








1 i i 








^ 


•eiTOiaj 








: i 








« 


•OfBH 
















ss 


1 


WOX 


: 






i" 




: : 1^ 




s 


••ITOIBJ 




• 










i 


: 


••I'll 




: 




1 "^ 




: : »H 


li 


^ 




IBJOX 




1 i 




II ii 


: : '^ : : 


1 : ^ 


: 


n 


•enraiBj 










: : : : : 


: : : 




lO 


•oriH 


: 


t 




1 i i 


! ! <H I : 


: : '^ 


li 


2 


1 


•|«;ox 








II i i 






•orraraj 








1 • '• 






li 


c« 


•«TOl 








1 ii 






1^ 


<o 


1 


mox 




^ 


-^ 


1 ii 


• 1 eo J : 


: : CO 


IN 


i 


•«I«m9j 




i 


I 


II ii 


! : (IN : : 


: : (-1 


i 


3 


•oi«W 




1- 


^ 


ii 


j • w : : 


iiii 


S 




' 




2 


I 




ViolationB of various provisions of liquor law, 
excise law, etc.: 

Election law 

Excise law 


Liquor law 

Liquor law (second offense) 

Liquor-tax law 

Liquor, selliuK on Sundar 

Liquor, selling without lloensp 


ii I 

ri i 

l: i 

|§ i 

rf \ 




O 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



885 



1 


kt 


•mox 


J J 




H : 




H • 




II : : : 


: : : 1 : 


il : 


:^ 


•9ITOI0J 




II : 




II : 




1] ::: 


: : : 1 : 


I : 


: : 


•»I»H 




II : 




II : 




ll : : : 






• M 


1 


•Wox 


: ^11 S'' 


S 


1 i 


: :^ 




.« . U3 


^ 


■.■^ 


••ITO19^ I 




II : 


:il : 




J I I 


: : : 1 : II : 


•^ 


•e|»H 


: " 


i-^" 


^ 






^^ • -H 


i§ 


e 


•nm>x j" 


I '^ 


: 








I'^ I 


t • ! *^ 


r 


• A 


•eiTOia^ 


: ; 






II : 




; I I 


: : :| : 


! J 


: J 


•9I«K 


:" 


: " 


• 




1 : 




'n ^M" 


:-:-: -y 


1 ^ 


:* 


1 


wox 






J 




1 ; 




1! " 

11 : 


:** 


•9i«ra»^ 


: : 








1 : 








: : 


•oi«W 


: : 




II * 




1 : 








II - 


.to 


►k 


mox 


-2 


S 


1 " 


'^ 


- 


'^ 


I'^ ! 


iii-ir 


f 


•OIBUIOJ 


: : 


: :l| : 




-" 


M-^ 




: : : : II : 




•9I«H 


-2 


j ^ 


" 


"^ 






ri 


. . . vH 


1 " 


r 


1 


•mox 


; ; 












f iii 




1! ; 


."^ 


••ITO»j£ 












ll : ; : 




II ■• 




•eroi 
















II : 


'.'^ 


i 


mox j 




"^ 


• '^ 






i iii 




li " 


i^ 


•OITOWJ 1 












II : : : 




ll : 




•»i»w 


j j 




^ 


1^ 


: 




11 iii 




II " 


.-H 


i 


mox 1 






1 : 






II : : : 




i; 


•p4 


•oi«aioj 


i I": 


: 




II : 




11 : : : 




i; : 




•9IBH 






1 : 




II : : : 




i; : 


:^ 


1 


IHJOX 








1 : 




II : : : 




! : 


•.•^ 


•9i«ra0ji : 








1 : 




II : : : 




I : 
il : 

II -^ 




•enw 








1 : 




II : : : 
II : : : 


f:-f-]4 


•.'^ 


H 


•mox :* 


: "^ 






1 : 




'.^ 


•oninroj 1 








1 : 




1' ; * ' 




II : 




•9n»H :^ 




II -^ 


p4 


II : 
I 


\ — '- 


11 : : : 


: : : 1 : 


II '^ 


't>. 


'^m 


mox 


'^ : 


!*•* ! 


iiini - 


;s 


aiBmoji -^ : 


: -^ !l : 










: : : 1 : II : 


l*^ 


'9v»n 




- 


' 


"^ 




<~ roi^ 


a^'fci- 


1 ! ! ^^ 


I - 


;a 


f 




•mox 


00^ 


3 S 


'^ 


• c^ 


ot^ 


;^ S 


r-« 


•OITOWJ 






1 i 


:M 


« 


i 


> : :^ 


: : : 1 ^ 
: : : ' 


! \r 


•omi 


00.^ 


2 S 


i=" 


2 


• 


■* ^^ 


6i-.^^ 


Attempted arson, nrst 

Attempted arson, second i I 

Total 1 9 


r-- 




' 




^ I i 

a : : 

1?: : 

o t ! 

1 :i 


o : 

f 1 

< 


•I 

il 
..II 

III 


• 
• 
j 


< 


i : 

s 

1 i 


Anon: 

Arson, flrat 

Arson, second 

Arson, third 


II 


! : 



Digitized by 



Google 



886 



The Immigration G>mmis8ion. 



s:^ 
s 



s 

45^ 



I 



I 

I? 



S 

^ 



•§» 



I 



M 



1 


kl 


Itrjox 




'.'^ : : 


. . CO 


II : 


II : 




:|| : :- 


i 't-i 






•0IBUI9J 






: : : II : 


II : 












•9]«K 




'.'^ : : 


• ; 1 M 


-i 


II : 




: 1 : :" 


' :'" 






1 


•TOOX 




-5S « :^ 




- 


: <^ 


; i's 


.^ 






•aiBUI9J 




i*^ : : 


: : « 11 : 






: : :" 








•ei«H 




^51 M ;•< 


' i 2 




eo 


: ** 


: 1 :«S 


' r 






1 


•Wox 




.00 • '^ 


' : ^ 








: 1 ^ ;C 


• ; 






•eiBraaj : : 






: 


: 




: : : 








•9l»W 




.00 . ;^ 


* i 8 


IM 






: '^ :S 








o 


•I«lox 




: r '.^'' 


• . (6 


IM 


: 




II :r 


> ; ' 






•9l«uioj : : 


'. '. '. '. 


: : : II : 


: 




.11 : : 








•oi«w : : 


: : i*^' 


' : '^ II : 






'II : :" 


) . • 






►k 


Wox 


'^ 


;«6 ; ; 


w ^ir 


« 


. «^ 


II '^2 


'.'^ 




•t* 


•OIBUIdJ 






: : : II : 


I! J 


: : : II : : 


' : : 




: ; 


•oi«H 




• CO • • 


i i "^ 


r 


r 


. (d^ 


■|| r 






:** 


■| 


•Wox 






; J ^ -. 


; 




« -r 


J J 






•9i«m8j 




















•9I«H 






. ^ ^ 






II : :- 


; J 






1 


•Wox 




• CO . . 


: : '^ 


*• 






•i ir 


» . • 


I*^ 


','* 


•d|«ra9j 




'. '. ! : 










II : : 






: : 


•9niH 




;C0 ; ; 


. • lO 


w 






1 ir 


► • . 


j'' 


'M 


5 


•mox : : 


: : : : 


: : '^ 


: 






II : : 






: : 


•oiBuiaj : : 






1 : 






II : : 








•9i«w : : 


: : 


: : '^ 


! : 






II : : 








«1 


•mox : : 


: : : : 




1 : 






II : : 








•9i«ra9j : : 


'. '. ', '. 




1 : 














•9TBW 


: : : : 


: -^ 


: 














Jl 


•i«jox : : 


;W ; ; 


! S 


: 






1 ' '"^ 








'ei«ui9^i{ : : 




I I I 


1 : 














•oi«w : : 


.« . . 


: : s 


1 : 






'. '.^ 








^1 


•I«10X 


I ; 


:a : : 


: : « 




•A 


•A 


^^« 






• n 


*9[inn9j : : 


: : ; : 


: : "* 


: 




: 


1 ' ' 






: : 


•9|BH 




:a : : 


: : ^ 




•6 


•6 


^^C 






;»& 


1 


•Wox 




:S - :g 


1- 3 


M 


a*^ 


J^- 


:2| 


-s - — s 


'apranj 




•« 1H «F< 


* : - 






M 


• • 


: : : : : : : 


••l»K 




:ff : :2 


'-^ g 


CO 


a^ 


a- 


ir* 


-s - --«s 




' 




1 


' ' i : 




i 

1 

< 




1 ! 
1 


Bordary: 

Attempted burglary, first 

Attempted burglary, second 

A ttmintMl hiirfflATv. thlrrf 


Attempted burglaryj third, and grand larceny, first. . 
Burglary, flnt. 


S:| 

is 
1 


II 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 887 



IS i 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



888 



The Immigration Commission. 






4 



I 



>l 



•si 






■« 



? 



^ 



N 

•-a 
n 

-< 



' 


H 


•I«*OX 










: : 






: II : : :- 


** 


'epsuxdj 














: II : : : : 




•roi 














: II : : :- 


: : - 


1 


Wox 


rt ; 


: ^ 


'• 


i 6^' 




- 8 




•i iii' 


: * 


•eiwTOi 


: : 








; ; 


; ; 




: : : '.'^ 


: : - 


••roi 


'^ I 


I ^^ 


;Ci 


1 « 


^Mm 


- !^ 




: : :" 


. . n 


1 


•moi 










: :^ 


• eo 


1 i'^ 


« ^ . .^ 


: : ^ 


••(•mej 






1 : 








|| : 


: II : : : 




'•Hfl 






1 i 




: :« 


: ^ 


1 i" 


11 '^ '' *•" 


• : •"* 


o 


mox 






li : 




II : i*^ 


; '^ 


i ' 


Ml iii: 




•9ITO19J 






II • 




II ' ' 




h : 


:|) : : : : 




•eroi 




|i 






: ^ 




•II : : : : 




s 

1 


•WOX 






: 




r^ ; 


I '^ 


1 ': 


II ^6i .r« 


: : - 


•anrawj 


; ; 




II ' 




II : : 




JL • 


. : : - 


: : "^ 


•9I»K 






\ 




ir: 


*^ 


1 : 


1 ^c* so 


III* 


1 


Wox 












'^ 


i : 


'• I • 


: : '^ 


•eiwnoj 


; : 




: 








i| : 






•91BW 






i * 






: -^ 


1 : 


'^ : : : 


: : .'^ 


1 


•moi 


" ; 


^ M 


1 i 








1 : 


: : :« 


■.-.r 


•erwnej 


^ ; 


: ^ 


J! 








11 : 






•eHH 






i '' 










1 III** 


. . CO 


1 


•Wox 






II : 












: :| : 


•9!«III9J 






1 : 










1 : : : : 


: : 1 : 


•9I«W 






1 : 












: :| : 


1 


•imox : : 




1 : 








: 




: : 1 : 


•erroiej 




1 : 












: : • : 


••TO 




1 : 












:":f : 


H 


•wox 1 - : 


: '-' 


11 • 










; : :« 


::(=*• 


*eiimaj 












» : 






'9im 


•^ : 


'^ 










: 


: ':":^ 


-f-j— s 


\l 


*mox 






i ; 




•^HlH 


": ** 




1 : : :«* 




•»Iimej 






II : 




:^ 


: ^ 


: 


H : : : : 




'9vm 






i 




\ i"^ 


*^ 


" 


i wr 


•e* « 


t> 


mox 


t^-cs 


-r "2; 


^<4 


'* Mb 




- 


-.d 


II ^ CO m « 


«S 2 


•9i«raoj 


'* :*" 




1 ! 




i: 






II ' "^^ 




•»I«H 






1" 


> o 


f-^W* 


r^ <» 


^6 


1 -- 


coK- 2 




' 


- 


ill 
fit' 


f I 


s. 


i : 
1 : 
3. : 

] ; 

1 1 
1 ^ 


ExtorUon: 

Attempted blackmaU 

Attempted eztortfon 

Blackmafl 




o : 

1! 

H 
II 


Attempted forgery, second 

Attempted forgery, third 

Forgery, first 

Fomrv. second. 


Forgery, second (2 indictments) 

Forgery, third 

Toua 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



389 



^W 






_:l! 



I : 



: 



TT 



r-" 



-<^ CO c* 00 oa C4 



liO -4 A<H 



228 



• »-i .eo 



5? : 



««DC4 0Oa)<J 



p^GC^^ i-ICOf-4 






2 



a 

P 
II 



Hi] 



o9 



la 



- wJ 

I |iin mil I 






I1I^ 



Digitized by 



Google 



390 



The Immigration Commission. 









I 

I 



I 



it 

vl 



11 

5" 



3 



"8 






n 

< 



1 


H 


•mojL 




:|| : 




1 : 


• j'^ 






II : 


: ; : 


Q : : 




••imiTOj 




:ll : 




i ' 


:- 






II : 


:l : 


! •• 




•9Tm 








1 ' 


.« 






II : 


:| : 


1 :: 




i 


•WOi 


I*" 


* :** 






s^s 


^co 


S 8 -^-^ "* 1 : : 


•e — 


'9tmm£ 








: 


• :« II : : 


^ ^ 


: m :: 


: : 


•9i«K 


• •" 




** 


5** 


^S 


^« 


2 2 — 


« c« 




•0-4 


•-< 


THOX 




«-• 


"^ 


'H 


e,^ 






r 


: ^ 






•©jBraaj 






: 




:^ 


II : : 




-^ 


M-^ 


''J'_ 




•©I«K 




^^ 


'^ 


'H 


^'S 


: : 






ir 




o 


mox 








^ 


^•« 








:l : 


1! ;•: 




••nraraj 


: 






• 


: : II : : 






: 1 : 


Ii : : 




•eiBH 


: 






1 -^ 


■~ — If 


• • 






: I : 


il : : 




o 


WOX 




CO 


CO 


i i' 


-? 


• • 


-1 i 






« • 


•apinwj 


: 


: II •" 


'■* 




:- i| : : 


: :» : 




1 : : 




•9i«w 




iir 


Ol 


I 


-^g 




IH »H 






^ :^e« ; 


1 


imox 




ill i 




: 


' :'* 














'arsmej 




















1 : : 




•»l«H 








1 : 


:« 










1 : : 




1 


•mox 






^ 


1 "" 


• <i« 


I ', 








11 i; 




'9TBin9j : 








: 1 :- 






: 


: 1 : 


11 : : 

1 :! 




•ai»K 




•^ 


"'" 


I «r* 


II :; 






1 


mox 








: :^ 


'II : : 








ll :: 




••praiaj 1 










II : : 








H : : 




•oi«W 1 


: 1 : 






: :** 


'II : : 




• 




II : : 




1 


mox l_J_ 
•©I«ra9j [ 








: :*" 


'II : : 




: 




ll :: 












• 1 : : 








II : : 




•»i«H 1 : 








.C( 


: : 




\ '■ 




II : : 




H 


•mox 1 : 








: :* 






•■ 




H : : 




•9iBuraj 1 








. -tC 


'll~:~t 




ll : 








•oi^W 














II : : 




<a 


•moj, 


6i<< 


. ^ 




'"^1 i: 




11 - 




1 ii 


n 


•onraraj 1 : 








: :«|| : : 




II : 




tl :: 


\ ! I 


•Wl 




**'• 


. ^ 




• -s 


) • • 




! ■■ 




II ii 


: : 


p 


mox 




: ' SS 


i s 




• n 


^ r 




-"T 


. 2 


r' 


»^f« 


••nraro^ 


^ 


: : 


; 


! 


■ ;' 


\ : : 




: 




II iiiii 


'9X911 


J 


: S* 


: 2$ 


^o 


- s| 


ir 


s 2 


2 


2 


II t^^coicn 




' 




i 


III 

i 2 i 

iiii 

i It' 


1 i 
i : 
: : 

i i 

1 ! 
j j 

I : 


li 


» J 


1^ 
II 
{ii 


5' 1 

1^ 


1] 


i 1 

\ : 
; : 

\ i 

n 

4 


ll 
|| 


;i1 

ill- 
is 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



391 



SIS 






-^ 



-II 






s. 

I 

I 



»^ II © 

ll 



M 



Tlr^ 



S-' i 



CO , S 



T 



TT 



»-4 I O 



rir 



§".^ 



I -II 



a 



g 



IIS 



112 



«0,^^,HCt«-l 



*J 



g^- 



^^^^ — ^ec 



-^feS 



8-^ 



88^5; 



COM^SrO 



^!oS 



8-^ 



• A S ■ 

iiliJ 



iSSS 



I I". 



III. 

eSECE 



II 



.0^ 



^ 
5 



^ 

5 



3 



ill 



0i 



|l|5 
t I llll 

_: . §§§§ 

> 



I 



Digitized by 



Google 



392 



The Immigration Commission. 






s 
i' 






St 



I 



■si 



1 



3 



J> 



a. 



S 

n 



1 

1 


WOX 


CJb;* 


2 g 


85« 


ft 


^^ 


le 


a 


co«»^« 


0-^ S 


!'■ 


•91«ll»i 


•H • 


• i-1 






'•i 




■* 




: : : •* D "^ : 


•»I«Jl 


:3r5 


3 ^ 


8;^ 


n 




» i-1 


r* 


co*or>iHe 


— s| s- 


4 


mox 


•-1 J 


• '^ 






^ 


'^ 


CO 


• f-1^ • 


: :^ '^ 


•^ • 


•»l«ra9i 


1 : 








^^ 


'^ 


"^ 


: : : : 


• • • 


: : 


•»l«H 


^* ! 


• "^ 










« 


••-1^ t 


: :^ ^ 


" i 


£ 


3 


mox 


•*:S 


- 8 


:S- 


"II " 




e« 


-!•♦« .C 


; J O 


«: 


'9[wmaA 


^ . 


! "^ 


• 


• II ^ 


'^ 


•^ 


•^ • » 


• . . 1H 


"^ ! 


'^vm 


e^« 


-H » 


s*^ 


55 i : 






i .-icoM ;e 


. . » 


^ : 


« 

11 

If V 


•Wox 






1H 


^* 




i 


Li i : : 


• ! 1 ! 


(0 ; 


•»ITOI»J 






: 






ii 


I - - 


: : : : 


" : 


•»I«H 






II ^ 


"^ ! 




: 


1 : : i i 


: : : : 


M : : 




IB^ox 






11 '^ 


1-^ : 






II : : : : 


: : : : 


•aiimidj 






II • 


1 : : 






: •: : : 


: : : 


•»I«H 






•-1 


•^ : 




II : 




: : : : 




00 


mox 






' 




II : 




II: 




: : : : 




•ai«ra9j 1 




: 




P • 




II : 


'.'.'.*. 


: : : : 




•ai»Jl 










II : 






: : : : 


: : : : 


B :• 


II 


imox 










II : 




II : 
!! = 


II : : : : 


.* : .' '. 


II : : 


•aiBoiaj 1 : : 












II : : : : 


: : : : 


II : : 


. diBW 1 : : 












II : 


II : : : : 


'.'.'. ', 


P :: 


II 


•mox : : 




1 : 




II : 




II : 


II : : : : 




11 :: 


•aiBinaj : : 












1' • 


II : : : : 


'.'.'. ! 




•ai«M 












Il : 


1 : : : : 


'.'.'. '. 




(X 


mox 


I*^ 


! '^ 


"^ 


^^ 








• T^r^ t 


'.'.'. ^ 


'^ ! 


•dl«radj 


: : 


: : 


: 








II i 


II r \\ 


I ', '. "^ 


: : 


•»l«Jl 


i*^ 


', "^ 


'^ 


'^ 1 : 




1 i 


II : :" : 


• I 1 ^* 


1H • 


^1 


WOX 


: : 








1 : 








'.'.'. '. 




•ai^ttidji 










1 : 












•'Ji^w : : 








II : 




1 : 




: : : : 




^1 


•mox : : 








II : 




1 : 




: : : : 




•ai«raaj : : 








II : 




II '■ 


: ! : : 


',','. '. 




•9van : 








II : 




II : 


II : : : : 








' 




2 : : 
K : : 

^ ! : 

Ijl 


1 i 

"s : 

u 

< 


it 
il 


> 


', c 

ill 

< 




! 




* • • • 


Ii 
|li 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



393 




Xi 

•c 

,0 

■n 
n 






■CT3T3TJ 



II 









lllll 11 I II 






t 



L U t- t. k. 

3 3 3 3 3 

OCQPQPQpq 



II 



II 
k 



■£3 

P' 



79340'— VOL 36—11 26 



Digitized by 



Google 



394 



The Immigration Commission. 



•o 

^ 



I 






;S 






1 



I 



t 



0, 



s 



•J 
n 
< 



i 

1 

O 


•mox 


«MC»es 


s 


•c 


s 


« 


es 


•^XX 




s 










CO 


t>- 


■♦ 


00 


o 


p 


•anraiaj 










" 


" 






• 




'1" 












r 


•a[BH 


OOMWC* Jl tOOC<0 C« ■♦0C^« 


o 


.-•CJ 


i^'fl'oo 


"^ 


g 


^1 


•l«)Ox 


•o« 


c« 


:a 


©^ 










sp 












1 '^ 
1 


•aiBoiaj 


















: 












1 : 


•dIBK 


•o 


(N 


:3 


».H 










n 












M 


1 ^ 


& 


5 


•IB40X 


w 






?3 


t- 






® 


CI 


§ 




. CI 


CI 


* 


1 ^ 


•dioaiaj 
















I 




CI 1 




i 






i ; 


•Di«w 


CI 






d 


!>• 






«£> 


CI 


^l. 




r 


c« 


■♦ 


11^ 


i| 


Wox 


" 






w 
















r^ 








li 








1 


•oicuioj 
































1 








: 


•OIIBH 


'^ 






CI 
















t^ 








1 








*4 


n 




•^ 






W4 
















^ 








II 




-^ 


^ 


:i « 


: 






























Jl 






:|l : 


•aiow I 






^ 
















■* 








1 




^ 


-,; C* 


li 


mox 








; 
















^ 








1 








!i : 


•aiBuioj 
































1 








t 


•9rm 1 
























"^ 








II 








II : 


00*0 


•IB^OX 1 








^ 
















CI 








II 








I : 


•aiBuioj 1 
























: 








II 








:. : 


•dicw 1 








^ 
















^ 1 














1 : 


II 


•nnox 1 


























» 








I 








1 ; 


■aiBuiaj 1 


































! 








i : 


•aiCR 1 


























O) 








1 








t 


« 


•Wox 










to 


"^ 






c< 




§ 






'^ 


1 








1 "^ 


•dIBuiaj 










: 




















1 








! 

1 : 


•dIBW 1 








(6 


'^ 






C4 




§ 






'^ 










1 




•mo.L 1 


























^ 








II 






1 


•aiBuiaj 1 












































•aiBW 1 


























^ 


















^1 


mox J 


























CI 




'^ : 










1 ?• 


•ai«uia,^ f 








































1 : 


•aiBjv 


























S 1 


'^ : 


i; 








1 « 




§ 




3> 

c 



T3 

c c 

r 


i 

•- 


> 

J 

ic 

u 


(£3 
> 

J 

■a 

J 

ie 

♦J 

^> 

1 


s 

' 1 
1 

5 

1 


9 

rd 


> 

i 

I 

i 

jE 

] 


j 

■*> 

_5 
2 


1 
f 

1 

i 

1 

s 

xi 


1 
1 

1 

) s 

a: 


> 

1 

c 
"S 

c 

I 

1 

p- 


J 

t 

1 

1 

OCX 

1 


: 
• 

1 

1 


1 




1 


1 

c 

a 


c 1 




1 
1 


1 

1 


^ 
^ 


li 

•d • 

il 

5 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



395 



e««HC4iHeo 




8^ : & w 

MM 






^ _ O Ij O/ o 

t. ♦J*-» O o o o 



Digitized by 



Google 



396 



The Immigration Commissicm. 






o 



fe. 
I 



jS 



> 3 



I 

4 



-^ 



ft, 

I 

6 



< 



i 

1 


•moj. 


" 


II «o w w a 

1 """ 


•;5S 8' 


1" 


00 




ooe 


« 




a 


e*c* 


2 


1 


aiBinaj 




'~OC^'(?«0 




1 -i 

1 : 














«d 


•anrw 




^r> 


00 


^•veoio ^^ctct 


§ 


if 


•Wox 




I*^ • 


t • ! *^ 








1*^ 




"^ 


6« 


'* 


•dinindj 




: : : 


: : : : 












.: 






•»l»H 




1 i-i 


III "^ . 








'^ 




" 


6i 






' 


I 


Wox 




1 " r 


"^S Jo • 


rH«: 







Esl^^ 


a-^ 1 


n 




•»IBaidj 




: : : 




• 


j 


: 


" : : 


" i : 


C4 




••I'll 




C*iO ;^ 


^■^5 Jo : 


II ^*^ 


«0 




PH^.^ 


a- 1 


^ 


If 


moi 




1 ii: 


I 1*^ "^ 1 


1 -^ 


CO 














'* 


'aiemdj 




II ii! 




II : 












1 




1 


•aroi 




1 iii 


1 1*^ "^ . 


II '•'^ 


CO 










•♦ 




" '•^ 




.11 


mojj 1 : 


11 :; : 


11*^ 1H • 


II 1 




1 


















•aiBoiaj 1 : 


ll :: : 




i : 




















1 


e\m 1 : 


11 : : : 


1 1"^ '^ 1 


1 1 




















\ 


en"" 


•rnoi 1 


II iii 


. <Vh ^ . 


II : 






'"' 












'^ 


1 


•aiBuiaj 1 


II : ; : 




II 1 






^ 












-l 


W«W 


II iii 


1 1^ '^ : 


II i 




















g 


II 


moj, 


: : :- 


' ! 1 "^ . 


II 1 




1 
















Q 


•dIBuiaj 1 




Ill 1 ' 


II : 




II 1 
















II 


•aiuR 1 : 




« • ; tH . 






II : 
















II 


II 


mo± 1 : 




11^*^. 






II 1 
















|| 


•afBuiaj 1 






: 




II 1 
















ll 


•ai«W 




1 I'* '^ 






















n 


tf 


moj, 






;eO ; CO 








1*^ 




M 




1 


•ajBOiaj 




• I '• 










1 *. 




j 








•aiBjT 






■to ; to 








r 




C< 




CO 


Is 

"a 


r^ox 






























aiBiuaj 












1 


















'^vn 










1 : 
















1 


^1 


IBjox 1 : 


1 : : : 








1 : 








c4 




*^ 1 


•aiBiuaj 
•aiBW 




1 : : : 








1 : 








^ 




^ \ 




1 : : : 




1 : 




1 : 








•^ 




^ \ 




o 




52 


: : >, 


3 :J \ 

i 


1 


i 1 

N 


1 


1 

II 

1! 


• 

L 

I 

> 

; 

Is 

1! 


p 

1 

1 

i J 


•c 

1 

I 


> 

1 

£ 


• 

c 

1 


H 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



397 



R3r 



M atctow^^ 



^W 



2SS 



S8SII -^ZJS 



9 ^ 



a-^ 






'T" 



.c4t^ 



:S^ : 



S!9 



iH»N c«r^e<« 






;5S 



??SII -^^8 



« -" 



^§ 



I : 






~?r 



^11 



-«|^ 



II "-^ 



e 



o S 



A < 



■23 

lull 
a •o'S •«*'«* 

__ .Jilii 

lIUll li|is i III . 
pliii iiiil ^ &li I 






.2oe 



bb 3 



SSI 



^2 1 



li 



S2 



r 



' 1-^ 



Si? 

©C CO 

PtkTiJ' 






I 



Is 
il 

IS 

€ 
o 



••III 



£ 



Digitized by 



Google 



398 



The Immigration Commission. 



o 



s 

1 



I 

8 *^ 

1 



1 



s 

8 



ft. 



o 
< 



-a 
3 

i 


•imox 


00 •O'* 


^ 


^ 


S 






" 


CO 






§ 


^ 


OCOfH 


s 


M 


"* 


^ 


!; 


♦ 


s"' 




•01BUI9J 


























; 


c>< 








*« 










°* : 




■9IBR 


*-^^- s— - 


§ 


1 •ow'^3« "* '^•j^ 


?" 






•mox 








e«« 


c< 








- 


- 


'* 








CO 






NC^ 


** ; 


" 


•aiBUTOJ 








">i 


^?l~ 








1 : 
1 : 








: 






I \ 






•OltJH 
















■V 


" 








CO 






•ViC* 


** ! 


" 




■3 


Wox 


' *- ?; 










S 


^ 




s 






^oodt 


s« 


i 


•aiuuiaj 










" 






n 










i ; : 




if 


•9I«JI 


^ 








S 


N^ 


?3 






.»» 


1 : 


i| 


5-3 


•mox 












w 








- 


r 


i 






"^ 






!" ; 




9iwn9,^ 






























: : 




: 1 


•9l«W 












^ 














^ 






^ : 


1 *^ : 


:| 


^1 


_lBiox_ 
























1": 


11 : 

If: 


II ^ 
















I-' : 


; 1 






















|i : 
















1 : : 


:l 


•9IBW 1 






















1 : 


II : 


!! -^ 
















1- : 


:l 


i^ 


•mox 1 












- 


- 


- 




- 


1 : 

1 : 


II i 


1 


















1 : : 


;:i 


t si 


•9i«uia^ 1 












II : 


1 


















1 : : 


:l! 


1 




•9I0H 1 






















1 :■ 


II i 


1 


















1 :: 


i5 


ceo 

II 


•l«lox 1 








^ 




- 






1^ 


II : 


11 






^ 










l^ : 


•J 


•9iBradj 1 














I :|| : 


II 
















1 : : 


:S 


■9l«K 

:i«iox_ 

•91^1110^,1 

•apiK 
















- 


- 






|-!l : 


II 






'- 










1-- : 


:l! 














- 


1 : 


II : 


II 


















I : : 


:| 






















1 : 


II : 


II 


















1 : : 


:B 










- 












- 


1 : 


II : 


II 


















1 : : 


:fl 


3 


•ivjox 


'^ 


M 


« g? 






^ 








CI 1 «-. 


il 


•9i«ui9j 1 








"~r<N~ 










: 
"1^ 






■* 










« 1 «&« 


11 


•9IBW 1 


^ 




















i| 


ii 


•l^jox ( 
























: 
: 


ll : 


II 
















1 :^ 


•J 




























1' 


















:|i 
















' 








: 




II 
















1 :" 


:!! 


P| 


•l^ox 


















4 


II 






-• 










1 "* ■ 


= 2 


•9|t;ra9,i « 
























II 


















:h 


•DTOK 
























i! ~ '1 






'^ 










' "* : 


:ll 




13 

o 




1 

£ 

1 
c 

1" 


i 


a: 


I 

Pi 


c 
? 

1 

i 

-i 

Pi 


Pi 


c 

i 

c 

c 
c 

1 

c 

CS 

Pi 


1 

Pi 


T 
C 

c 

? 

1 
:^ 

a: 
Pi 


c 

1 

c 
c 

? 

c 

V 

a 
Pi 


i 

'1 

Is 

c: 

Pi 


. 


1 


1 

c 

1 

c 
PS 


t 
t 

i 

1- 

1. 
t 

o 
PS 


f 

1 

•< 


1 
1 


c 
Pi 


1 



Pi 


i 

o 


•o 

c 

t 

es 

C 

a 

1 


> 

1 
1 


B 


:^ 
• r 
:^ 

;b 

•I 
■1 

1 

CO 


1 
o 

I 

i 

1 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



899 



g^-^s 



- ess ^ - 



^ |< 



TTlT 



-. I< 



"3 ©5 = 



- O 3 



> 



o o o o 

a d a a 
op o o ^ 

3o3o ^ 



P^ 



11-^ 



112 



1 

^ 1 



Digitized by 



Google 



400 



The Immigration Commission. 



3 



I. 



8> 



1 



•s" 

i 



o 

ft. 



H 

.J 

n 



I 
t 



E 



-pno^pwuo 



s« § §9 



'mo;L 



'iiS|aiO| jeq)0 



■qsipoMg 



*ire|U0A«is 



•iWODg 



*iiV]S8nH 



•qsnoj 



'WifSaMJox 



'QBiireninil 



•HBiiB^I 



•qsiJI 



•Jf^O 



'uvtiuao 



'qonaij 



•q«n8aa 



•qsjnBd 



•9sau|q3 



•UBipwreo 



'ireiiaoqog 



•rreiJjsnv 



mox 



'ojSok 



•eiRAV 



3-^ » isl 



8-" S gS 



^ S^ 






"^siif 



'SSS22 



w^tjg^rt 



a** s 



3522*^ 



82^ 



5»C C^Q- 



i'^ S S^ 



^ 



S5 : ft «S ig! '^'SS 



* 2 5^ 



rfT^Ms^ 



S-* s as 



CO NO 

c3 S2 



^ s« I 



gj s» 



ffaS" 



'iiis 






gg^l^gf 



^eoooj-j5ar* 



|g«2»55 



I^iC ••QCO'TCO 



.^eojc 



"IrPfs 



gs^'g^l^ 



ga^ssjn 



"|3^=^g=^ 



gi^i^l- 



^s-|3|!; 



5 ii"2S5s 



C*or^Oi JO ; o 



!3 SS^ 



»>. ^r- 



g 5^ 



gS § 



g§ 



*g82' 



^$2 



"8$S2 



aggsi 






TW 



CO t^o 



'' "^^.qs^ 



cr — — ic vo 
S! I- cc tc 






w CO I .^ I 



|g2|g|g 






§3*9552 



|5 :g«$o 



§1*^2882 



S2Sa2SS 



fS'S^S^ 



fc2 2^ 



gfeocj'rci'cl'.-J' 






^ QO e< »*• 1^ ^ ■* 
^ eS r« t» u) r« M 

to >o 00 CO oe o> o 

c-^ I sc''-*'-^w »H o ^ 










5 



ot4o&n !; £3 
a 3 K o*^ S c^o 



85 

!i 

eS-c. 



Is i-H 



3 o ;♦* 



cTES 
§QOOO>>«< 

o 






Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



401 



gS3l 



Hlf 



■^^ 



5;g8g22 



SSSSS^ 



•©'*«'♦ 



•82- 






^5* 



-;5eqpr 






2»g^ 



06- 



ssgs 



iSfe§ 



s 



s3 



f^ 



go 



ga 

M 






mS 



Si 



255 



P^ 



sS 



SS 



-Too 






3-< n6< 



i P 1 

I P 1 
1 ^S « 



o 



a 



I 



Digitized by 



Google 



402 



The Immigration Commission. 









I. 



o 

I 

O o 






I 






©1 
n 



'ivioi pncjo 



•Wox 



"O^iajoj jaqio 



SSIMS 



•qsipaMg 



'aBinoABis 



•qojoos 



'cre]S5n^ 



•qsiioj 



'crefSaAjof^ 



uBitrenqin 



•ireil«ll 



•qsiJi 



'SJOpUBtlOH 



, Tiaaio 



'iniuiJdo 



•qanajj 



•qsjl8na 



•qsnrea 



•osauiqo 



•nuipcireo 



•xrejuraqoa 



•mox 



•oj29\ 



•9»mM 



o 



gS 31 



5S 5S 



SS 8*^ 



25 5S« 



tH toeo 



iSSS S52 



eSS S^ 



«' 



83 f22 



!SS 1^ 



OON ^w 



^w o^ 



-rr^ c^ci 



2S ^« 



«oo s-^ 



CO If CJ P 
•»0 I--C 



»0Q ift CO 

535 c5o> 






§1 ^SS §§ 



e?J5 "ga K§ 



gg •'SS |S 



: 3 : 



13 ^B^ 3^ 






^eo jgoi 



gl^PgS 



II "g5SI 8$ 



?5S5 -^282 5S 



|3 ''i'^ 3" 



« 



2 -g3 |1J 



is 



55 i-^ : * 



II *22 §S 



ig ^|S 15 



!«■*« ^« 



55 TS»e5 58S 



85 :S5* Si« 



SS 2^2 S2i 



|S *§ 



'^ g^ 



c*r 

8 



M 04^0 NfH 



sg §ig is 



5eo» 



^ 



2 >> '• ''ti 

I 2| is. 

O 



a 3 






8 :>» 
I i « 



O 



^OO o>> •< 



«..^-=S>>5 



o|2: 



iglilliiil 



O 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



403 



»i 



|«5 



sw 



CO 1-1 



?5^ 



SI 


1" 


09 


"T 


a- 


1 




W 




1 


«0 


M 

^ 



9 S OO 



N pi tjo 



s s« 



^ § i§ 



as^ 



S3 K 



s s 



28 
"16 



"?~r 



i s 



H 



S s- 



S§ ^ 282 



2 ?5 S^ 



CO m SS 



sS 






:a 



II 



"W 



s« i 



is I 



2§ 



wS 



§^ 



-55 o 



H i p. 

•O CO «c^ 



i § §8 



lO CO CO»M 



2-* ?S 



i^ 



^ r^ 



5^ 1 r^ 



MS 



5'^ I l^ 



S 






O 



111 3 

a 
O 



Digitized by 



Google 



404 



The Immigraticm G>inmi8si(m. 



Co 

I 






S5 « 

f I 
it 

f 



i 



"2 



•i«i<n pwuo 



-pa^jodej )0M 



•Wox 



'oSiojoj jaqto 



'uepa^g 
•poBnoos 



■vissnH 



•pn«ioj 



'^mi 



•pirejwi 



'^mmuao 



•puBpiij 



*pTrai3ua 



•«p«n»3 



■iCjii2anH-«TJ)6n y 



'oioq-OAnvn vb%o^ 



*j9in^ JO oonpIqiJiq 
SuDJodoj )oa ojoq-OADB^ 



It 



mox 



'a:9|aioj joino 



•puBiioog 



'paviaii 



'Xini(iij»o 



*pavi8n3 



ispwiBQ 



9Ai)«a |o njoq-9A|)«f{ 



2S5S 



52^ 



'^^'-' 



*S : 



:S^ 



55 ^S"^ 



3 



»!' 



^82 






S'^^i^ 



2SSS 



2S5fe- 



SS*- 



J5 ::-- 



§1 8*= 






sss*^ 






g5-:«^ 



! «-. 



g gCC- 



^"'^ 



1 1 Sg^^sif 






•SS'^^SS 



Si 



ga^^zae 



«coi-i •«c«ak 



'^•^toctecto 



gr^^ 



09 ^ CO CO 00 *^ SP 



:S 



53 



9^ 



§g— •f:S 



e<9-^<-4^cekoo 



ii«se|| 



eo55 • •<-ioa» 



§§SSSS2 



<osc«e<«(^oo 



2S 



t^ e^ «0 <-< b> IP IQ 



3^^ :82 



2geo«»^r5g 



8§ 



^«0 0)OC4 



g|l528gg 



ii 






g| 






SI, 



s : 



s 



§} 









''0*2 



•aid 



|ll 1 fill 



i'S ti 



§ 



iilll 









o o (JL 



rfQQOOOX 



So'l 



3 

o 



O 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



406 



§15 



SSS?: 



228 



8~S 



S^S 



SSg 



9SSS 



3S8 



SrSS 



g 2 



^&l 



111 

o 



a -a 

£ -5 

•2 "S 

H H O 

I 



Digitized by 



Google 



406 



The Immigration Commission. 






J 



I 



8 
1 



•5§ 



^^ 



1^ 



5 



I, 



03 
< 



3 

00 



•5 B 



6 I 



° I 



3 1 



•XO%<y\ puBJO 



t>. J5 ft CO 



•payodw ^o^.^ | 



o 

i 



•l«1ox 



'U^dJOj J9q)0 



•o^paMg 



I 






35 5j c-» o t>. «2 00 



2SgS5g 



gjij - 



U 






•pirenoog 
'cjssnH 



♦pireioj 



•^WI 



•pOBIMI 



'i^avuuao 



•puBiuiji 



•pireiSna 



•BpcoBO 



-anH-B |J isnv 



-OJoq-OADBQ nnox 



22g 



§*^ 



^-i 



•jaqiw 
JO aoBidiiviq 3u]poa 



fe5 

^^ 

^ o 

o a 

^ 3 



TB»ox 



35SS?c 



'n9idJ0}J9mO 



•puBnoos 



'pirniail 



*iClIBIIlJ90 



•pu«i3aa 



•«p«treD 



•jamnj 
dAHBO JO iuoq-9AnB>j 



o I «De3'vc»a»»0 



gjjPC,a;Og 



^ li :^ 



-^S'" 



(CeorH •«. MO 



* »-< o C< C2 l^ M? 



S»-:5 



5a -=2 



R :''"SS 



S3S 



SS 



I S=" 



!=N 



ssa- 



^1 
Si 



^1 



gg-'--"='f:3 ! 



J cr o c2 o X r. 



eot^ • -i-ioos 



sSS 






tcgwNt^c an 



«>S : 






^S-^^ :S2 



s: 



::??«'* -^S^g 



QrHOOaOOl 



^ X M 'JO CI 

rori CI — ' « 



I 

O 



111 



«?§ 



CO . ^ .-. t- 



-i»o»*^r*pi 



r»tr^ -e^w 



|g2^S6g 



AOd^eieo 



eo»-« • 'tor 












:^ c §5 " 15 

cCQOOOX 
O 



OCOiH -tO*^ 



S2::*gS 






o sR § S S S3 ® 



lill ! 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



407 






5t2§ 



SSr: 



Sfi-^Si^: 



CO 'r^an*- 



^Sc 



-ggs 



\^ 



1^3 WoSca 



Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



408 



The Immigration Commission. 






o 
O 

I 
I 

^* 

52 



I 









I 



I 

s 

5 






5? 

m 

< 



l«)(npawo 



*po)jodai )o^ 



•pnoi 



*ii^ajo| joqio 



-aopoj^S 



*piiini<»S 



*iiI8BnH 



•poBloj 



•XiBii 



'ptrafojl 



'.^OVIXUOO 



■pa«iuu 



*puBi8u3 



••piwiO 



'£ra8imH-«vn>nv 



*aioq-OAn«o nnox 



•J9in«| JO w«idmjiq 



11 



mox 



•oSiaio; Joq^o 



•pa«n<K>S 



*pa«iui 



*iC train J90 



•pirei8aa 



•«p»n»o 



-Bf aA|)fni |o ojoq-aAHtSK 



lllMI 



S 2* ^ 



Sfcglg 



S3*a 



SS3^ 



«?:« 



s^ss 



SiSS 



«s= 



5188215 



*sa* 



II :g; : ^ 



£3!9 '^niook 



2 1 as^^'sRs 

5? 



"•g^^si 



§§••••239 



:R 



9S 



Sl 9g""*S' 






ss««ss 



c? : :^ 



iS^SSSg 



ClgC4C4r^Ok2f 



r»» • ' '90 a 



9522:^^3 



-■S--^ :82 



sJLji— 



?! n-'H 



%\ *S*""S 



83 



Sl =- 



sl - 



|_|__SS«^ 



55-^ 



si - 



fcS' 



gs-^-g^ 



S2 



sg' 



"3g 






O 



111 



Ifil 



5-" 



« • .^e* 



28 



go^«gjg 



sr 



iL 



iL 



8j_ 



^1 



i|-r 



11 



ij -'s 



^1 
it 



§1 "g' 



j^b 



El - 



= e^ g 



.fl5 

00 

C CO « 

C ? ° 
« ..S«S«Bof=3 8^ 

o 



c 



•B 3 "g"3 



iiiili 



1 



m 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



409 



3|S 





eo 




• : : 




ssgs 


I 


-s-» 


s 


S 


•MC^e^ 


2 


i 


--s-* 


9 


li 


-^es 


S 


S 


^g,^ 


» 


a 


^is^ 


^h 


«8Jo 


i 




«a^ 


!S 


$ 


c«aoc« 


CI 


u 


«j« 


p 


09 


s§a 


g 


\n \ 


n 


n 


Hi 


i 


2 

CO 


• M • 


s 


i 

of 


?:§s 


§ 


^J0« 


s 


§ 


^j5^ 


s 


Is 


3§S 


i 




ia* 


s^ 


3 


-.05;^ 


s 


i 


-^§2 


5 


1 


Sg3 


§ 


i 


Sp. : 

111 

111 


■3 
1 


"0 

i 





79340*— VOL 36—11 21 



Digitized by 



Google 



410 



The Immigration Commission. 



I- 
I 



b 

.o 

£ 






I" 

St 



•5^ 

















•m<n pnwo 


^4 


»« 


t* 


sti^-'sa 


« 


« 


jgoc. 


S S3 


M 


i 


S 


<o*o 


1 


gC4 


B 


•pe^jodai %os. 




: : 


ill ii 


: : : : : 


ill ii 






I ;^ ; 


- 


" : 


^^ 


fe 


•mox 


^ 


|i^ 


c«» 


- 


jnt^oo«H 


s "■'• 


O 00 




S'-?^ 


sg- 


s 


'xoswxi J9ino 








^ : 


• JiHiH • 


eol iH J^ 


: ^ 




«^«o j 


2 1^- • 


t* 


•«IssnH 












^lH 


N *4 j 


^ « 




•o«<* : 


= 112- 


2 


•poBioj 












eo j 


eoj • • 






e«^« \ 


i-i 


oo 


•^mi 


^ 


t*^ 


N 






lH • 


r-l JWCI 


• •* 




^^M»C« 


si's i 


» 


•pnuiMI 








-- 








« ^iH 


: *^ 




« 


* : 


-,2: 


g 


'Iiromjaf) 








I ii 


J.HOI 




CO ^ • 


i "^ 




M 


^ 1 


ecir- j 


»«- 


'pn«lSa3 








rH • 


• I I 




- i i 


: 1 




lO 


eo 1 


00 tck 1 


o» 


•«p«iniO 








1 •* i 


|^«c« : 


o 1 1 |« 


« to 




o«eft 1 


S|i*: 


$ 


•iLre3 








: j 






M M 




eo '^ • 


^ 


ri 


o 


•UJoq-9An«n xnox 




'ON 


»o 


32— SS«> 


si ^**" 


S ^ 


«a2§- 


i 


r 


1 


■91 )on iuoq-9AT^t^ 








Ctf-« 


• MiOC* 


8 ^ \ 


^ es 




3-^8-^ 


!3 


s j 


3 


1 

i 


•Wox 




"^ : 


-* 


^jH->^2^^ 


gl «— 


S 2 


e«geo«.H 


i 


ii 


g 


-nSiajfv iamo 








I •• i 




: j 


eo! • • 


jet « 




^ i^ i 


r» 


« \ 


« 


•pirei^oos 








1 I I 




- : 


"1 • • 


•CO CO 




jioiH • 1 


«o 


o j 


O 


tUSSiiH 








1 i" 




j : 


-1 ii 




1 


eo^«o j 


o 


o \ 


o 


•ipKII 




-* : 


-^ 


1 '^ 


|e«^ : 


•o 




e« N 






(O 1 


<o 


Z : 


'^i 


•pireiajl 








i=- 


|«^ 1 


^ 


CO 1^ 


«o r^ 


-^^ 


28 : 


s 


§ j 


§ 


'iuBnuaf) 








1 '• : 










^e«^io 1 


e» 


hi 


< o» 


•pn«i3ua 








•H j^ 


^^c«^ 1 


« 








1^ 


Ofc^ 


c* 


^ i 


Is 


*vpBiroo 








1 »oci.. 


1 jeo \f^ 


ei 


'-r 


<* iO 




a 


a : 


e|;S: 


s 


9AW«n ;o nJoq-9Ai^N 


■ 


:«c« 


-^ 


1- 


-• |a>«n 


S 


t^e^ 


a Qo 






1 




3| 
55 


i 




Hi 

:>ogq 


> 


:i 


i 


s 


|J 




s 
1 

C 


> 
1^ 


ij 
ll 

Ii 


^ 
g 


1 : 

i 


3 

2 

g 

o 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



411 





•m<n pnwo 


3«^ 


u 


S 


SS 


•J55!: 


s 


11 COO«C« 


CO 


'^ 




^ 


ss 


§ 


" 


§ 


& 


mox 


00^-. j5 


^ 


ejr^'<*e««^ 


g 


II Mnc^fH 


t» 




iHOk 







s 


•oSiWi^jamo 






^C* 


CO 


04^^ 1^ 


to 


11 


1HIH I 


CI 






c* 


N 


a i 


a 


•pininoos 








r-4 


- 


-H 




- : 


e^ 








- 


- 






: 


: 


* i 


•* 


•B|ssnH 








- 


- 










^ 


^ 
















- 


- 


CO I 


CO 


•nflnvoj 


-• 




N 


CO 
































CO ; 


CO 


•iWI 


. :- 


c« 


CO 
















-^ 




- 










•* ' 


■* 


•puBiwi 


CO 




« 


o» 


gc-- 


C4 


« 


N 






04 










sa : 


5P 


-aaeajo 








: 




















^ : 


•^ 










-* : 


- 


•ixretmoo 








-^ 


fH 














1 


















-* : 


iH 


*pirei3aa 


- 


MOI 


»• 


ct 


i-i 


M 


■1 


















• 


2 


spBireo 


CO 


NO 


to 


C^-^i-^^QC 


si 












^<o 


t» 


S8 i 


$ 


•iuo<HA|^«u wox 


0«<N^ 


^ 


SS5'«:2S? 


s|- 


■*!-• 


<o 


'^ 


S 


^ 


§" 


i 


-9 J 90a aioq-eAT9«M 












IHN 


cieo 


1 














^ 


^ 


a> • 


o> 


"5 
l| 

2 
J? 


TWox 


U3C4 


QO 


^ 


35«o,«s 


1- 






-• 












r-1 


1 


•uSiaio; ssmo 


-• 




-^ 


M 






: j 


ill 


















"i 


C4 


•pirei^oos 


lH 




^ 


N 




-^ 


^^ 


CO 


















to • 


•0 


•sissiiH 














: 




















•H 


»-• 


•H ! 


- 


•lB8TllJ0d[ 








^ 


-^ 




-* 






- 


1 














j 


: 


0» j 


« 


•Ami 














i 




•H 


- 


II 














-^ 


- 


^ ; 


« 


•pWB\9Jl 


04^ 





eo 


gjco 


.H«> 


ti 


1- 






-^ 






^ 


■^ 


3-^ 


u 


'immuao 




^ 


- 


CI 


-* : 




J 


-^ 


II 














-* 


- 


^ ; 


-v 


*pire[8Q3 








CI 


c* 


1 0»iH 




-* 


^ 


II 














i 




(O • 


CO 




"* 




c>» 


CO 


ooee^'^io 


«i 














CO 


CO 


^ j 


CO 


9AW«n ;o nJoq-«AHBN 


'^ 


Clt>j 


s 


oooscot>»« 


s 






■VfH 


>o 


I- 


10 


s 


s-^ 


s 




1 


1 


> 

1 


c 
1 


1 


i 


a 
1 

li 


> 


1 
\ 

a. 


> 
> 


i 




If 

u 

p 




1 
« 




1 


i 


1; 

1^ 


1 
=1 

j 


1 

n 
1 




1 

3 





1 

•a 
C 





Digitized by 



Google 



412 



The Immigration Commissicm. 



CQ 



J 



I 

I" 

52 



II 



I 






4ii 



S 
5 



I 



H 

n 
6l 





Tn<npawo 


U3 


eot^io 


^ 




t« 


00 




S 


«^ 




c« 


s* 


a 


s 




1 


mox 




CQO.M 


■* 




•o 


o 




g<N« 


' 8 




oe«c« 


'^ 


•n3|woj jaino 






^ : 


^ 




ct 


c* 












c« 




e« 


•o 


'oapoAS 






- : 








1 
















- 


•pn«noos 






^ : 


-^ 








1 












- 


- 


« 


*«I8snH 


















II 




• ^ 


1" '^ 




c« 




M 


o 


*I«8n)jO(i 




























j^^ 


M 


c<« 


umi 




e« 


•H 




— 




-j 


— 




• 8 




:^ : 




Ih 


•paBiwi 




^^ : 


> ^ 


1 : 


c« 




•iCairaL»o 






-* : 


•^ 


1 












4 lH 


1 : 


-* 




•pirej8ua 






-* : 


- 




eo 


eo 






^ 


: - 


1 i 








o 


tjp«a«o 






<V ; 


■r* 




\ 






^ :^ 


4 M 


1 i 


eo 




eo 


a 


•Qjoq-dAUBa no^ojj 


*o 


t*-* 


o 


•HM 


eo 




<.^g 


\ SS 


«5*8 


g 


s 


JO aoBidqvrq 3ii|Vod 
-9J )ou iuoq-aAi)«K 


•-1 




i 


-^ 














• -• 




« 


c« 


• 


CO 


1 

So 

|i 


Wox 


CO 


-H^ 


00 


r^C« 


CO 




eort -^ 


F QO 




00 -HO 

1-^ w^ 


S 


s 


•ii3|dJ0/ j»qio 














- 


- 




^^o 


1 ■* 


: 


— : 


es 


! .^ 


•pa«noos 










;o 












, ^ 


: 








h 


umi 










1 






1 


^ •e«i 


> -<• 










Ih 


•pmnwi 


c« 




^ 




^ 


^ 






• « 


> 00 




oo 


•o 


eo 


2^ 


'Ixnuu^o 


- 






-^ 








1 










« 


- 


eo 


Ih 
1- 


■pa«l3oa 






•^ : 


'- 


1 






II 








1 i 


•^ 




-^ 


•«p«n«o 












\-\ 


^ 




'^ : 


: '^ 




o 


'•^ 


o 


c^ 


9An«a JO oJoq^AiiBK 


*^ 


<o j 


r^ 


1 




1 


II 


<ococ 


a 


CJJCOOO 


So 


Is 

1 




§ 


c 

1 


3 

c. 
a 

1 


2 

c 

C 



i 
1 


! 


3 

5 


1 

11 

11 

O 




ll 

ij 

§ 






"i 


li 

i; 
1 = 

1 


60 

g 

i : 

60 ' 

II 


1 

1 

1 

1 


2 


1 

o 

1 
1 

J 





Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



413 



1«?a)pOTJ0 


eo 


1 = 

II 




t^ 


CO 


-neoeo 


r* 


«e 


|i 


•povodM PN 






« 


•^ .' 


t^ 












t- 


fx. 


•mox 


ec 


1 n^ " 


! 




eoct 


•O 1-1 


! 


•»l«Ai. 






^ 






^ 












-<• 


•iCeJiinx 








'^ 




"" 












^ 


•pirei 










^ : 


'^ 












^ 


'oapdAS 






g 


CO ' 


?? 












s? 


•poBnoog 






% 


eo '' 


CS 












5! 


•«!SsnH 






t» 


« : 


CO 




^ : 


'^ 


^ 


•I«3n;joj 






^ 


'^ : 


C4 












w 


•pnBioj 






CO 


•o 1 


oc 












00 


'iCsMjOK 






■* 


'^ : 


tC 













lO 


•Ami 






eo-Httj j 


o 










o 


•piretwi 


^ 


-g.«s- 


i 




M ' 


CM t-l 


1 


•pirenoH 










c« 1 


c«» 












c«» 


'/iwtmi»o 






o> 


•o • 


■* 












■r* 


*900«JJ 






CO 






eo 












CO 


•pmnaij 






00 


eo ■ 


- 










'j 


- 


*pirei8aa 




eog-<a-^ 


CO 






•^ 


'^ : 


s 


•«p«ireO 


C4 


.,.,. 


1 






*"* 


•H 


§ 






1 


t* 


•o J 


CM 












£J 


'Sfn^s pawnn 




1 ^s-r 

1 -■ 


o 


r 


«^ 


M lO 


3 




' 


II 
If 

1' 


1 

p 




E 

i 




o 

1 

O 


i 


i 

i| 

ll 
§ 




o 
55 


1 


1 i 


1 





Digitized by 



Google 



414 



Hie Immigration Commission. 



I i 1 



•T«|ox 



'9Knui9q)0 



•3(«A018 



•qo^oos 



'ovfAinnpiivag 



*ire)8SiiH 



•qsnoj 



*inK)pC9}| 



'ib£9^j^ 



•ire|irenq^n 



•qinos 'irermi 



•qyoN 'wsimi 



•qsw 



'MOjqoH 



•319010 



'UVUU90 



'qaoaij 



'qspiuij 



•4»ll3ua 



•irenwuo 



-aBaoiqo 



•qonaij amji 
joq)o 'ireipwreo 



'qaoai j *in»ii>wi«o 



•ireoiJIV 



«3 

o 



^ii§£ 



sags 



S2;^2 



s^s§^ 



J325g3 



S^»qS 



ft 1^00 



'8Sg« 






OQO»9«I 



5SgS 



153:; 



S'^l;*" 



§9Si! 



S^'^SS 



8SS^ 



2«!5« 



i 11 ^s§s§ 



'5S$? 



J^I^gS 



9;:ss3e^ 



o8^3 



"82 



8 :S 



2|$?58 



»$2 



QgeoQO 



*s-^a: 



• r^^r^-ej 



vHr«»-l»Ht^ 



IS" 






I 
Jl 

SI'S 
jls 



QOiOoao 



s-^a^ 



S-^S" 



'^iii §8SS 



8*J5 



o^« 



«C4Qm 



on 



828 



"SS 



00 CO <0 C4C9CtCO 



SS89 



00 00 



n •00 lev-iiob 



s^^a 



eooo rH^eoo 



'"JgSS 2gSS 



:£;^2 



joog «^g5 



'^S 



'«S 



2^8 



8558 2-^83 



•e ••« leeoeoio 



^TiiSt « -fi^ 



'3S 



;!;88 



■^J?:: 



S9 



^ li ton 
2j 



eo II "*« 



g|| - 



5 II 



-H 8^ 



iL 



s|| - 






O 




Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



415 



* 



:2S 



^S 



s 



g : 
S9 



33 



2S 



i« 



»crt 



is 



s- 



S" 



|_ i 



S I 



3 I 



!i ilfll 



a 
D 



§ 



Digitized by 



Google 



416 



The Immigration Commission. 






J' 



I a 






n 

e2 



•mox 


S9S 


s 




g 


' 


3M sgil 


CO 


30 
1,191 
168 
al,588 
360 
477 
80 


eo 


o3 


•S90UI jaqio 


•ONMOO 


r- 




^«^ OOrt^tf 


1 ^ 
1 M 


«S?28sa^ 


g 


oo 


■31BA01S 


•««'MC«»'«« 


2 'I 

'1 


S"2 ^25 


« 


M 




jgogcocj— i p 


I 1 


•o 


•qoiODS 


eo 




to 


OB 




a»ic^ cc- 


?:" 


^ 




« I,-«t^CS»-< 


e* 




•irepvunipuTOg 


-» 




o 


- 




S28 '- 


s?: ;S 




J^COCOgCO 


g ^ 


ntJ^ssriH 






■* 






ooeoto wcocii© 


$ 




Oftcieoioco^ 


CO 


- 


•qsiioj 


t* 




S 


?5 




gS3: ^-52-4 


g 




S2g35;82 


g 


«D 


•Ut}0|XOJ^ 


^^ — o 


ec 




S :2 **z;i2 — 


s 


-^JS^S'^SS : 


i 


«o 


•jtjxa«pi 


■♦CI 


» -r 




«tf5«0 ^<4iO»?4 


s 




g«5gOO- 


* 




•a«]u«uqi]T 




M 




1 ^ 




gjwoo ^^2--^ Is 




8 :2-« : 


'II ; 


•qinos 'ireiicu 


s 


-"-23 


s 


-^^ss sgsg 


5 


2|$gSgS 


J 


a» 


•q^oji 'oBiiwii <N^«« 


■^ 




n i*^ :2S2 1 $ 


.OIJ«3§gOC«N 


X 


CQ 


•qspi 


eccoog^ 


55 




R2g «^-glc 


s 




jogcOg^u,-, 


ac 


<o 


•MOiqdH 


<NC02g 


^ 




«S- ''^sjs 


s 


-* -H -^ •« 2 f* «^ 


§ 


«o 


•3l9ajO 


! i"^^ 


o 




t>.i-io« :*««2 


;; 


:t*-*t*c«o 1 


s 




*innuj99 


eociioa 


? 




sss «*^2S 


I 




g 


;3 


•qouaij 


- 


Mr- 


- 


o 




coM-^ eoc>«oo 


s 


— t- — --t^o-* 


s 


c« 


'^s\uuu 


N 


^^ 


t^ 




lowjc I *o»e<« 


5 


:g«,«c,<N- 


^ 




•qsn^na 


^^^8 


s 




SSS 2--S5S 


S 


^SI-'SS?^ 


s 


eo 


•a«ii«ai3 


I 




j 






•o 


J t* lO eo 00 •© 


g; 




g«,gc^ j 


g i 


osooiqD 


-^ 




- 


CI 




CI 


i i *^ 


• «er^ 


e3 




oo«o^ooo> '• 


^ I 


•qouMj usqi 
joq^o 'n^pmreo 


'^ 


-♦o 


lO 




^;:S ^ 


■s= 


g 




Oeoo-^oci 


=., -- 


•qouaij 'ireipiniBo 


^ 


eoua 


SJ 




2S5S '"-^;: 


g 


~' 




3 j « 


•ireoWV 




-• 


O 


t^ 




iC^O 


c*«« 


S 


-1 1 


i 
i 


■A 

II 

Il 

o 


> 

1 
.1 

> 


1 


>4 




i 


1 
a 

c 

1; 

ji 

o 


.c 
c 

1 


i 


■1 

X 

2 

c 


> 

c 

J 

•c 
o 

1 
1 

C 


1 

o 

1 

C 


> 


1 




H 


t 

1 

il 

la 
O 


1 




i 




tk 




^ 




(A 

"S 

u 

o 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



417 



S82S 






SSS*" 



s«s*^ 



2**S'" 



^25^ 



0C4m^ 



OOftObiQCI 



g«ga 



s«s- 






S^a:?-" 



;:<^5;- 



^^S« 



w^r^gc 



gs=:sB^ 



§§ 



ss? 



2S 



B 



s-^ 




nn^H^S 



Digitized by 



Google 



418 



The Immigration Commission. 



•I«10j, 



528 



^r^ ^2ii 



^g2gS;S3S 



§ -«gsgs 



*88pvj Joqio 



00 CO cs <2 ^ 



-^g 



eosacor^co 



•3l«A0lS 



^ I0»000 



g=^2 



•qsnoog 



og «^«5« 



• «.-i .f-i 



•aBjABorpaBog 



18 : :82 



OO -W '^M 






1 



1 






'oeissTiH 



«o ^eoo^ 



«o^c<» .eo^ 



toeo«t- 



•qsjioj 



8-"^ *2Sg5 



4(0^«OM3»H 



82§S 



'neoixd)^ 



'JTI^BJ^ 



•n^iaenqin 



eo eotodOft 



loeoofti-i 



« r!<Nt*- 



2ioc«-<eo^ 



§5-" 



t^ •hCOO'O 



TRnog 'a^n*?! 



-^JS 



oofisspssr 



'58 



•q^joi^ 'UBTI^qi 



«0 •^009 



e>ieot«^ •« 



.^r^C« toe* 



•qsjJi 



'Mdjqan 



$ "-§' 



•feS 



« .e««^ .d 



r^ t^C* 



'§•' 



•3(aoJO 



K-i •eoeoo 



oeococ4co 



'nviiuao 



■*? ^^S5J3 



^•H«O<-lC0^ 



•OOg-"* 



•qonajj 



^ i^e^oco 



•qsiiraij 



S : i*-^ 



kOCOO 'ff^ 



•qsii8ua 



t 00.-l^ 



sa 



»-l«D»-l^-<«iC4C 



cot»oe 



•a«nBOJO 



t» •oeooo'^ 



4S 



•dsaujqo 



•ioq^o 
'nB|peu«o 



■qoadjj 
'aBip«a«o 



53 « :82 



8 -^-^SS 



•UBOIJJV 



ri^«0 •i^od 



1 

H 
hi 

n 

el 



O 



l|t| 

«l|p 
o 






'IIIIIW 

ml Mk 






ill 
n 



s s s *f^^ 



«3 
O 



o 



Digitized by 



Google 



General Tables. 



419 



J 




•c 

• 




« 


|s= 


i 


s 


s= 


B 


^ 


gc 


2 


e 


r 


§ 


^ 


S : 


3 


5 


|S 


g 


5 


gs 


§ 


^ 


S- 


i 


^ 


g« 


1 


1 


s= 


53 


<5 


l=- 


ss 


8 


r 


S 


P 


s- 


§ 


$; 


g : 


s 


^ 


52 


1 


« 


s-^ 


s 


r* 


S.« 


3 


n 


oeo 


CO 

« 


^ 


So-- 


s 


c^ 


^s-^ 


s 


s 


2 i 


S 


5S 


S"^ 


i 


s 


N- 


S 






: 
: 
: 

1 







Digitized by 



Google 



420 



The Immigration Commission. 






S 
09 



^ 
^ 

.« 



I 

I 



t 



CO 

n 

< 



*WOX 


«eoac 


s 


§ 


r^ 


§ 


33 


OS 


§S 


CO 


1 ^ 


? 


sg 


^S 


^ 


§ 


11 

II 


c 






•SQOBjjoqio 


»-«c« |co 


«o 


.M«0.-l l-tjl^ 


! 


»i«^e>«fMco • 


GC 


1 ^ 


s-^-- 




•3l«AOI8 


j 


-^ : 


-^ 




CO -M-MCO 





i 


ecH^ jco^ 


»|| 




•*^ON 




•qinoos 


t-l 




« 


^ II 


«0»H 


"^w* 


- 


1 




• •^^ • 


-|; 




"♦coo • 




'a«iA«a]puB38 








CO 


CO 


1 ^CO 

1 '^ 




•«»««o 


gJ 


1 


C«l 


i-.C«*« 1 


"ii 




»«?S : 




-u«|S8nH 




• 








|co 




NW 


3^ 


l| 


N 


<*N : : 


00 II 

1; 




to jgo j 




•qsjioj 








c« 


w 


^^M 


■«-«D 


1 
1 


- 


•o^o»^ 


s^ 


ii 




.g-5- 




-UW}xvH 














• 










: 


h : : 


-II 




t^ jr. '- 




•IB^H 








•0 


10 




•0 




P<i-» 


90 


1 





r^t-i^ • 


s^ 


1 




toectfi^ 




•owninmn 














c« 




W^ 


»o 


'1 




: : : : 


ill 




^ -CD ; 




•innog 'wB\mi 


- 


--8 


?5 


-s 


-^^^ 


oc 


■ «3«:2»»- 


s 


1 -'«S'°2' 




•injoK 'oBimi 


: 








: : 




^ \ 


- 




r^ 


«o-^e« • 


«|| i-«;.; 




•qsfJI 


- 




« 


» 


^215 


t-00 


s 


1 


N 




^co * 


«o 


1 -="S- 




■MOjqaH 






-^8 


?1 




^ 


-•5 


s 




c* 


eo jto-i 


- 


^ 


S^g-' 




•3l«»J0 






: ; 






- 


jd j 


CO 




C0-«^"* • 


O) 


• 


COr-lOfc-- 




•aBuudo 




»HWe«3 


« 




«5^^o3 


$ 




«D^acco« ' 


s 


« 


!?. S-^ 




■qan